512MB enough for gaming at 1680x1050?

Greg86

n00b
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
54
Hey y'all,

I'm gonna be picking up a new 22" monitor next month and I'm a little worried cause I'm running a 4870 512MB that I picked up over the summer. With the trend that games are going now (huge outdoor environments and hi-res textures...etc) I'm worried that the 512MB on my 4870 wont cut it (Even though it is GDDR5). Its hard to find much reviews that give benchmarks for 1680 x 1050, so do you guys have any experience with running games on this res (with AA) with only 512MB of video ram? Also, I remember reading somewhere on [H] that cards with ~1GB of VRAM will play games much smoother than 512 cards, not necessarily with higher fps but rather with less stuttering and pauses. Is this true for all resolutions or only for really high ones like 2560x1600?
 
512 should be fine for 1680/1050 i havent had issue with my 4870 512 and said resolution
 
I've been doing fine at 16x10 with only 368mb.

No Crysis'ing though.
 
Been using 512mb at 1680x1050 for years now. Currently on a 9800 GTX. Starting to show its age in FC2, doubt its because of the amount of memory though.
 
512mb is more than enough for 1680x1050. I'm using the 4850 512mb for 1920x1200 and games are running perfectly.
 
Depends on the game. Crysis cranked will use more as well some other games like GRID, Clear Sky, modded Oblivion, I forget what else. For the most part it's more than sufficient though.
 
It should be fine in nearly all games. If you're buying a new card now, it might be a good idea to spend the extra money for 1GB to future proof, but if you already have a 512MB card, there's no reason at all to upgrade yet, IMO.
 
Depends on the game. Crysis cranked will use more as well some other games like GRID, Clear Sky, modded Oblivion, I forget what else. For the most part it's more than sufficient though.

That's probably one of the only select few games that you can't run on max settings on a 512mb...but medium settings still looks stunning.
 
As long as you have a semi decent cpu which is basically anything C2D or better 512 is going to be more than enough for everything except Crysis at 1680x1050. The extra 512 barely translates to extra frames
 
As long as you have a semi decent cpu which is basically anything C2D or better 512 is going to be more than enough for everything except Crysis at 1680x1050. The extra 512 barely translates to extra frames

It will be more than enough, and even Crysis will look good. I'm running Crysis and Crysis Warhead at 1920x1200 with medium settings (anti-aliasing off) on my 4850 and E6750. Getting about 40fps and looks stunning.
 
It will be more than enough, and even Crysis will look good. I'm running Crysis and Crysis Warhead at 1920x1200 with medium settings (anti-aliasing off) on my 4850 and E6750. Getting about 40fps and looks stunning.

Yeah I got a [email protected] but paired with a lowly 3870. Good news for me is only got a 1280x1024 res to fill so yeah I can hit 40fps too...most of time. Not upgrading my gpu because it won't show as much yet at 1280x1024. So I need to upgrade the display. But as soon as I go 1920x1200 the 3870 is going to show just how inadequate it is. So basically I have to make a $500+ move and get a decent 24" and a appropriate level gpu. But considering the rest of this budget build only cost me $500 I'm waiting for Santa ;)
 
more than enough i have a HD4850 512MB @ 700/1150 playing crysis at high to very high settings @ 35-50FPS @ 1680x1050
 
more than enough i have a HD4850 512MB @ 700/1150 playing crysis at high to very high settings @ 35-50FPS @ 1680x1050

I have a 4850 with my E6750 and while running Crysis on medium settings at 1920x1200, I get stunning visuals and ~40fps. Haven't tried at max settings and 1920x1200...more than satisfied at medium settings.
 
A resolution of 1680*1050 displays 23% less pixels than 1920*1200.
The current games texture only require more than 512MB of RAM when gaming at 1920*1200.
Cranking up the AA and AF may be an issue at 1680*1080.
 
Back
Top