64 or 128 meg?

[dairyboy]

okay, like alot of the crowd im sizing up the gainward ti4200, but what i want to know is if its worth paying the $120 odd more for the 128mb version?

Im on a budget so the 64 meg might be the better option, and having the faster memory makes it seem attractive as well...

Any game that would really show this kind of difference?

[Ragnor]

Practically no difference in *current* games...

The 64mb version is clocked higher on the mem, using lower ns ram too.. it definately looks to be the way to go..

but then again no one knows yet whether Unreal Tournament 2003 or Doom III will utilize 128mb ..

hmm

probably still not worth the $$ for the extra ram and a slower memory clock speed.

Go the 64mb, I reckon.

[asanthadenz]

Go here (http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020409/geforce4ti4200-01.html)

Dont knw if u agree with Tomshardware reviews but as i can see the 64mb version is much quicker than the 128mb version because of its clock speed.

jst go to the site and check it out. :D

[I.R]

I got that exact card ;) I haven't maxed it out yet but the ram is some brand that I've never heard of....... funny thing is that running it @ stock it's 513Mhz as opposed to 500..... I could only get the ram up to 560 with no artifacts (3.5ns = about 571mhz)...... I managed to get 9766 on 2001SE on a 1700+, fsb133, 256MB ram, running ME :eek: So for $420 it's a bloody good card...... and lots of room for additions..... Tt GF4 cooler anyone ;)

[Humantuckshop]

Hmm, how long do you intend to keep the Ti4200, Dairyboy?

If you are going to upgrade in the next 6 months or so, then I think the 64MB version would be the card of choice. If you plan to keep using the card for about a year (or more) , I would say the 128MB card would be better in the long run, as the next generation of games will (of course) utilise more RAM.

[Ragnor]

What are you upgrading from by the way..?

[KingJackal]

Originally posted by Ragnor
What are you upgrading from by the way..?

I'd guess he has a 32MB GeForce2 GTS ATM.

60% of the way down the page:
http://forums.overclockers.co.nz/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47&perpage=20&pagenumber=3

;)

[dairyboy]

Id like to keep it for a long time, but thats not really possible with this kind of technology is it :rolleyes:
Yeah will those TI4200 arnt so incredibly expensive that i couldnt upgrade in another six odd months, i guess.

"I would say the 128MB card would be better in the long run, as the next generation of games will (of course) utilise more RAM."

*keeps trying to imagine doom3 and still cannot decide*



And yeah KJ your right on track of course.
Im upgrading from my current 32mb Leadtek GeForce2 GTS w.TV-out.(if anyones interested in this card, it will be in buy/sell exchange in a week or so....after end of tech term)

[MrThc]

don't forget that the 128Mb Gainward Ti4200 has Video in, tvout, VGA and DVI.., the 64Mb version only has DVI, VGA, TVOut but NO Video IN.. if video in is a feature you'd like with it, then its worth the extra to get the 128Mb card :D

[H2gO]

same topic *well close*

anyone here modded their Ti to acheive higher ground with anything than the standard thermal solution found on these cards ?

*H2O even*

:rolleyes:

[mird-OC]

tojja is probably the man to ask... i seem to recall him mentioning something about a Ti4600 owner helping him out with the PixelIce blocks of his...

[H2gO]

cheers for that mird-OC

Will Do

;)

[I.R]

Tt does a GF4 cooler (http://www.thermaltake.com/products/chipset/g4.htm)..... looks like the standard 4600 thermal solution except it's copper..... I haven't come across anyone in NZ stocking them yet :rolleyes:

[dairyboy]

Originally posted by MrThc
don't forget that the 128Mb Gainward Ti4200 has Video in, tvout, VGA and DVI.., the 64Mb version only has DVI, VGA, TVOut but NO Video IN.. if video in is a feature you'd like with it, then its worth the extra to get the 128Mb card :D

oh, i did nearly forget about that. Okay that just makes me even more unsure about which to purchase. I dont do video editing or anything, but it would prolly be fun to try.

It definatly makes the more expensive card seem more capable

[I.R]

I had a VIVO card before my current one....... only used video once..... probably coz I have a TV and a digital camera :p

[rickh]

I'm definately looking at these too... the reviews indicate that these boards come within an inch of the 4600 performance when overclocked.... including the review on OCNZ site. Yum. Best price I've found so far is $526 incl .... http://www.oemcomputers.co.nz/oemaccess.htm#DisplayCard

[Grrr!!]

You might want to consider a Leadtek with video in/out 128MB for $461 at Starlyte.

[Mr ABIT]

id go for the 64meg version just cos it will o/c higher:cool:

[I.R]

There's really no point in getting a 128 card and "future proof yourself"....... by the time games come out that actually use 128M a GF4 will be slow as :p

[SilverPriest]

FSAA @ high res.......
Larger textures.
We shall see when Doom3 arrives, and hope your gf4s arent outdated.....

[farns]

Heres Anandtech review from yesterday of all the makes with extensive 64vs128mb benchies
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1643&p=17

[Agent 86]

Interesting reveiw on anandtech. Bit more indepth into image quality for a change. Sounds like the filters are similar for most of the 4200's. And we all thought no games would take advantage of 128mb ram but JK2 already does according to his benchmarks. Would of been good to see a leadtek included. That may have swung me more towards a 128mb if I was getting one now.

[Gh0s7 L3mUr]

I still think the 128MB cards would be a lot more attractive if the manufacturers had used the high ns ram instead of the slower stuff they presently use. Especially when you have to pay an extra $100 odd for the priviledge.

[dairyboy]

Yeah those benchies on Anand do show the 128mb version kicking a large amount of ass, over the 64mb....in the right situations....(Jedi Knight2 at high Resolutions)

Why wernt there some more memory stressfull bench numbers tho?....wheres the 4x AntiAliasing that should have been tested at every resolution? Surely you would notice the extra local memory on the cards when things like 4x AA is used...or am i just confused?:rolleyes:

[Hans]

Coz the cards won't be playable @ 1600*1200*32Bit*4X FSAA.

Notice the performance for Unreal Performance Test 2002 under 1024*768*32?? The framerate is ~ 44 FPS. Turn on that 4X FSAA and you will get 10~15FPS. Sure, the 128MB will kick 64MB's ass but what's the point? The game is not playable.

The frame rate for Jedi Knigth II would prob be better not but by much. It's performance is determined by both the CPU and VGA. However, Ti-4200 won't do too good at 1600*1200*32*4X FSAA.

[dairyboy]

yeah i guess that is a bit wishfull......*imagines next gen x2 cards*

I think ill prolly go for the 64meg card....seems like american reviews saying US$20 isnt much, translates into NZ$100 for the bigger card.

So Gainward or Leadtek.... thats a whole nother topic:eek:


um..Hans do you drive Toyota?

[Hans]

Yeah, Toyota AE-101.

[KingJackal]

Unfortunately you won't see many manufacturers using the faster RAM on the bigger cards. Otherwise the price difference would be HUGE.

After all, the majority of the cost for a manufacturer goes into the RAM. So doubling the amount of RAM increases the cost of the cards A LOT. Therefore it's necissary to use slower memory just to stop the price from driving up.

It's unfortunate, but those speeds aren't chosen based on performance, but rather cost.

Prices

$180 USD for the 64MB versions ( $370 NZD ish ), and over here they're not much more than that. But $200 USD for the 128MB versions ( $420 NZD ish ), and you can't fin them here for much less than $500? Somebody's skimming the 128MB cards here..... :( :mad:

It's easy to see Anand's justifications with US pricing. 10% more performance with the 128MB card would offset the around 10% higher price - giving it the same bang/$. Which is something to be envied ( going up in price, retaining value ).

But with NZ prices, it's more like a 25% price increase :eek:. So I'll still be buying the 64MB card. Even if I could ( which I can't ) afford the 128MB card - with prices like they are here, I'd be buying the 64MB card....

[I.R]

The Gainward 128 GS uses Hynix 4ns which should = 500Mhz but on "enhanced settings" it OC's to 520 :eek: up from 444Mhz..... The 64 non GS uses 3.5ns Etron Tech :confused: which should = 571 but I can only get to 559 with no artifacts from 513 :(

I blame my PSU...... really I do.... I'm not crap at OCing or anything like that :rolleyes:

[dustyslapper]

That seems to be typical of the Gainwards - I don't think I have seen a ram OC over 600mhz yet.

[Roman]

Anandtech.com has done a very good analysis on the 64MB or 128MB problem, worth the read!

64MB or 128MB by Anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1643&p=2)

[SilverPriest]

Speaking of well worth the read, perhaps looking and reading thru the thread roman, before posting something that someone else has already posted ;)

[dumass]

Originally posted by Ragnor

but then again no one knows yet whether Unreal Tournament 2003 or Doom III will utilize 128mb ..




Unreal tournament 2003 runs fine on my 64meg geforce2gts/pro :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

:)

[NTBlowz]

UT2K3 runs faster on computer with 800Mhz cpu and GF4Ti4200 than 1.733Mhz cpu and GF4MX460...;)

[KingJackal]

Originally posted by NTBlowz
UT2K3 runs faster on computer with 800Mhz cpu and GF4Ti4200 than 1.733Mhz cpu and GF4MX460...;)

I would bl**dy well hope so. 1.7MHz? What's that? An 8088? :eek:

( :p @ j00r speelign )

Also, especially given the nature of the thread - it may be a good idea to say whether that's a 128MB or a 64Mb Ti4200 :D ;)

[NTBlowz]

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/roundups/2002/07/UT2003-CPU/image029.gif

[Wibber]

interesting, :) where's that from tho?

[kain]

Give Triplex MS GF4 Ti4200 64MB Hynix 3.3ns a go as it is guarantee to reach 600Mhz or more (max at 625Mhz) or 128MB Samsung 4ns that can reach between 580-600Mhz

[KingJackal]

Originally posted by Wibber
interesting, :) where's that from tho?

Lol - LAZY BOY!!! :p

The image he LINKED is http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/roundups/2002/07/UT2003-CPU/image029.gif

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

BTW - lol at the fact that you didn't link this image ( different level, COMPLETELY different limitation ):

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/roundups/2002/07/UT2003-CPU/image030.gif

[Humantuckshop]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KingJackal

Lol - LAZY BOY!!! :p



You call him lazy? You haven't even updated your Nvidia Design Specifications Graph yet. :p ;)

[KingJackal]

Originally posted by Humantuckshop
[QUOTE]Originally posted by KingJackal

Lol - LAZY BOY!!! :p



You call him lazy? You haven't even updated your Nvidia Design Specifications Graph yet. :p ;)

Yes I have.....

I just haven't turned into a GIF....

[Solid Snake]

I think 64MB IS faster than the 128 MB variant, but with the age of large textures [I believe UT2K3 utilizes a maximum of 2048 X 2048] now, 64MB may struggle with games with very large textures. I think I saw this somewhere in Jedi Knight 2 at some stage...

[NTBlowz]

If u play games @ max setting then slow cpu with fast gpu wins, but if u play games @ med setting than faster cpu wins.

And 64MB version can't do 6X FSAA @ 1280 X 1024 and up since it don't have enuf textures... but if u play anything @ 1024 X 768 or lower then 64MB is enuff.