More RAM vs Higher Clock Rates

ProfessorUtopia

ProfessorUtopia

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
147
I’m looking to upgrade my video card on a budget (~$150) for BF3. Something I’m pretty clueless about is that practical value of having more video RAM, and how that compares to performance gains from higher clock rates.

My sole application is gaming; single monitor, without 3D. I haven’t really made any decisions, but this comparison illustrates the dilemma I’m trying to overcome…

EVGA 01G-P3-1556-KR

-vs-

EVGA 02G-P3-1559-KR

On the one hand, I get 2x the RAM; on the other, I get higher clock rates and save $30. For my purposes, would I expect to see meaningfully better performance from the 2GB card?
 
that card is tool slow to make use of more than 1gb of vram for gaming.

and you need to list ALL your current specs, in detail, including your resolution when asking for video card advice.
 
Lower end cards like that will not hit the limit of 1GB, so I wouldn't worry about it. Also if you are willing to pay 169 pick up a 6850 instead since it will be much faster.
 
One more thing. If this is for BF3, you might as well wait and see if something newer comes out by October. Of course if you want a new video card to play games now then I would go straight for a ATI 6850, don't both picking up a Nvidia 550.
 
sc3252 said:
One more thing. If this is for BF3, you might as well wait and see if something newer comes out by October. Of course if you want a new video card to play games now then I would go straight for a ATI 6850, don't both picking up a Nvidia 550.
Click to expand...
you know there is an edit button so no need for a new reply.

and we really need to know his specs. he could have a pc that is not even worth upgrading or be playing at 1280 for all we know at this point.
 
cannondale06 said:
you know there is an edit button so no need for a new reply.

and we really need to know his specs. he could have a pc that is not even worth upgrading or be playing at 1280 for all we know at this point.
Click to expand...

I only edit to reword a sentence or a paragraph, not to add to a posting I have already made.

Obviously its a good idea to know what he is upgrading, but you already asked that so I didn't bother.:)
 
I do think ATI has a better mid-range lineup right now, but I was looking at EVGA for the prospect of stepping up to something better down the line.

Current Specs:
CPU: Intel Core i5-760 Quad-Core
RAM: G.SKILL 2 x 2GB DDR3 1333
GPU: EVGA GeForce 9800 GT 1GB

I've had no problem gaming in 1080p with 4xMSAA (2142, L4D2, Portal 2) I'd hope to maintain that for BF3.
 
ProfessorUtopia said:
I do think ATI has a better mid-range lineup right now, but I was looking at EVGA for the prospect of stepping up to something better down the line.

Current Specs:
CPU: Intel Core i5-760 Quad-Core
RAM: G.SKILL 2 x 2GB DDR3 1333
GPU: EVGA GeForce 9800 GT 1GB

I've had no problem gaming in 1080p with 4xMSAA (2142, L4D2, Portal 2) I'd hope to maintain that for BF3.
Click to expand...
you left out the power supply. a gtx550 is slower than a gtx260 so you will not be maxing out BF3 with it.
 
ProfessorUtopia said:
I do think ATI has a better mid-range lineup right now, but I was looking at EVGA for the prospect of stepping up to something better down the line.

Current Specs:
CPU: Intel Core i5-760 Quad-Core
RAM: G.SKILL 2 x 2GB DDR3 1333
GPU: EVGA GeForce 9800 GT 1GB
Click to expand...

Evga's step up program sounds all good but you have to pay msrp for the new card. You can almost always find a card for below msrp unless it just hit the market. On top of that you have to pay shipping both ways. Its almost easier to just sell the card on the forums and buy a new one although no one is going to pay close to msrp for a GTX550ti on the forums.

I just think that is highway robbery for that level of performance. I would go with an equivalent AMD card at that price or keep your eyes open GTX470 at a good price.
 
ProfessorUtopia said:
I've had no problem gaming in 1080p with 4xMSAA (2142, L4D2, Portal 2) I'd hope to maintain that for BF3.
Click to expand...

Unless some insane optimization takes place between the Alpha and retail, you won't be maxing out BF3 @ 60 FPS with anything but 480's+
 
ProfessorUtopia said:
I do think ATI has a better mid-range lineup right now, but I was looking at EVGA for the prospect of stepping up to something better down the line.

Current Specs:
CPU: Intel Core i5-760 Quad-Core
RAM: G.SKILL 2 x 2GB DDR3 1333
GPU: EVGA GeForce 9800 GT 1GB

I've had no problem gaming in 1080p with 4xMSAA (2142, L4D2, Portal 2) I'd hope to maintain that for BF3.
Click to expand...

all three of the games you listed are cpu limited games. bumping them up to 1080p isnt going to have a big frame hit because the cpu is limiting factor, not your gpu.

on a gpu like the 550 ti the 2gb of vram is a waste. the gpu doesnt have enough processing power to use all of that ram.

why not wait until right before bf3 comes out to make your decision? no one knows what it is going to take to run bf3 at max settings with aa on. maybe some benchmarks slip, new cards could come out, or prices could drop on current gpus.
 
hcc_tech said:
all three of the games you listed are cpu limited games. bumping them up to 1080p isnt going to have a big frame hit because the cpu is limiting factor, not your gpu.

on a gpu like the 550 ti the 2gb of vram is a waste. the gpu doesnt have enough processing power to use all of that ram.

why not wait until right before bf3 comes out to make your decision? no one knows what it is going to take to run bf3 at max settings with aa on. maybe some benchmarks slip, new cards could come out, or prices could drop on current gpus.
Click to expand...
well technically it does not need to have the power to use "all that ram". it only needs to have the power to use more than 1gb for the 2gb model to be worthwhile. but yeah the gtx550 does not really have that power to run games at playable settings that will exceed 1gb.
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Dude its not even in beta. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They like to say that, but at this point it's leaning more to marketing jargon than actual truth. The closed 'alpha' took place 3 months before the ship date. I'm sorry, but no game is still alpha when the date to go Gold is maybe 2 months away. The 'beta' that will take place in September is a beta for server loads and a demo/hype machine for the game, it isn't an actual beta.

One website did rudimentary benchmarks on the closed 'alpha', and I wouldn't expect those numbers to suddenly jump by 50% between then and now. Unless of course like I said, some insane optimizations take place.

http://gamegpu.ru/Action-/-FPS-/-TPS/Battlefield-3-Alpha-test-GPU.html
 
sircuddles said:
They like to say that, but at this point it's leaning more to marketing jargon than actual truth. The closed 'alpha' took place 3 months before the ship date. I'm sorry, but no game is still alpha when the date to go Gold is maybe 2 months away. The 'beta' that will take place in September is a beta for server loads and a demo/hype machine for the game, it isn't an actual beta.

One website did rudimentary benchmarks on the closed 'alpha', and I wouldn't expect those numbers to suddenly jump by 50% between then and now. Unless of course like I said, some insane optimizations take place.

http://gamegpu.ru/Action-/-FPS-/-TPS/Battlefield-3-Alpha-test-GPU.html
Click to expand...

You make a good point there.
 
"On the one hand, I get 2x the RAM; on the other, I get higher clock rates and save $30. For my purposes, would I expect to see meaningfully better performance from the 2GB card? "


You will if you plan on adding another card in the future.
If not 1gb is just fine.

But I would pick up a gtx460 1gb HAWK for 124$AR before I would get that much slower card.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127518&Tpk=gtx460 hawk
 
As others have said, at your price range 2GB is pointless.

I vote for a 6870 if you can find a good price. Otherwise a GTX 460 1GB should also be faster than a 550 TI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top