Memory Vs Speed For GW - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

eloshuayeshu

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Oct 2005

Mo/R

31 Oct 2005 at 22:37 - 1

<span style="font-size: 16px"><span style="color: #FF0000">This information is outdated. Do not use. If you need assistance please start a new thread.</span></span>

I am trying to decide wether to buy a 6600GT 128MB (faster) or a 6600 256MB (more memory).

My question is really specific to guild wars and no other game. Which card would offer me the best looking graphics when playing GW.

Right now I am running GW on a Geforce2 MX (hard to believe, but true). Both cards will run better than the MX but I am leaning to the 128. Please correct my logic: if my CPU can push the MX to run (well enough), coupled with the fast GPU on the 6600GT 128, GW should fly and have the same graphic quality of a 6600 256.

Which card will make GW look the "coolest"?

dnws517

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jun 2005

01 Nov 2005 at 00:19 - 2

get the 6600GT 128mb

for sure.

One and Two

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Aug 2005

01 Nov 2005 at 00:20 - 3

I had the same question and ended up buying the 256mb card.

However, it was not purely based on Guild Wars. I prefered more memory for some programs i use (editing photos and videos).

I can say that with my 256mb card (ATI X600) Guild Wars runs extremely well. Maximum settings, 4x Anti-aliasing, around 60fps.

Honestly, for Guild Wars, I doubt it will make a difference.

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

01 Nov 2005 at 00:29 - 4

Quote:

Originally Posted by eloshuayeshu

I am trying to decide wether to buy a 6600GT 128MB (faster) or a 6600 256MB (more memory).
Which card will make GW look the "coolest"?

every performance review gives the 6600 GT as the performance winner by a wide margin.

the difference is in the memory used.

the 6600 GT uses GDDR3 ram (G is special high speed graphics ram)

while the cheepo 6000 256 MB uses slow standard DDR memory

the GDDR3 memory is clocked 1000MHZ effective

EDIT CORRECTION

it is simple DDR plain not DDR2 memory which is even worse

eloshuayeshu

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Oct 2005

Mo/R

01 Nov 2005 at 00:43 - 5

Thanks Guys.

I really appreciate your help on this one. I am going to go with the 6600 GT 128MB.

Old Dood

Middle-Age-Man

Join Date: May 2005

Lansing, Mi

W/Mo

01 Nov 2005 at 01:44 - 6

You can get an ATI X800XL 256meg AGP or PCIe. Cheaper then the 6800GT....just as fast. Uses less power. Uses all 16 pipelines! It is a sweet card. Best bang for the dollars.

EDIT: Also it has the GDDR3 Ram as well.

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

01 Nov 2005 at 02:09 - 7

ATI is falling back dont get that one ATI cards dont suport the new shader 3.0 from direct X the 6600GT does

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

01 Nov 2005 at 05:54 - 8

Shader model 3 does not make any difference at the minute as there is no games that support it yet, also the new x1000 sereies if card from ATI all have SM3 enabled...

I have both ATI and nvidia cards, and price v performance wise my x800xl is amazing

EDIT - Nexus8, that blows that argument out of the window

Old Dood

Middle-Age-Man

Join Date: May 2005

Lansing, Mi

W/Mo

01 Nov 2005 at 11:47 - 9

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeXuS8

ATI is falling back dont get that one ATI cards dont suport the new shader 3.0 from direct X the 6600GT does

By the time they do use that Shader 3.0 there will be newer cards out there and a whole new "Price Game" to go by. Right now the X800XL IS the best bang for the dollars.

EDIT: Read the November issue of Millinum PC magazine. They have a great artical on all the video cards today.

eloshuayeshu

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Oct 2005

Mo/R

01 Nov 2005 at 12:52 - 10

The 6600GT seems to be the best card in my price range. The X800XL appears to be between $250 and $350 (depending on where you go). I am only playing PC until PS3 comes out so I don't want to invest too much

Old Dood

Middle-Age-Man

Join Date: May 2005

Lansing, Mi

W/Mo

01 Nov 2005 at 13:02 - 11

Hey...Price is important. I agree with you there. The 6600GT is the better card. So what it has only 128megs to the 256meg 6600. Speed is where it is at.

That is probably a wise choice in your situation.

Enjoy!

Spirital

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Oct 2005

Hall of the Necronomicon

Mo/E

01 Nov 2005 at 14:19 - 12

well my comp is a
-amd64 X2 3800+
-2gig ddr 400 ram
-ati x850xt
and i got cable for connection, so the game is fast enough i find.

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

02 Nov 2005 at 01:19 - 13

Quote:

Originally Posted by eloshuayeshu

The 6600GT seems to be the best card in my price range. The X800XL appears to be between $250 and $350 (depending on where you go). I am only playing PC until PS3 comes out so I don't want to invest too much

That easy
PC>PS3,XBOX360 and the new consoles coming out

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 17:30 - 14

Dont get me wrong, I'm not knocking the next gen consoles, yes they will be great, but they will never be as powerful or adaptable as a PC, Yes I have an Xbox360 on order and ill get it dec2, but all the new technology in that and the ps3 will be available to pc users really soon

TomD22

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

02 Nov 2005 at 17:33 - 15

Quote:

Originally Posted by cannonfodder

Shader model 3 does not make any difference at the minute as there is no games that support it yet, also the new x1000 sereies if card from ATI all have SM3 enabled...

I have both ATI and nvidia cards, and price v performance wise my x800xl is amazing

EDIT - Nexus8, that blows that argument out of the window

My X800XL is amazing, yes. But, you're wrong about nothing using shader 3 yet. I bought Fable for the PC the other day, and it uses shader 3, which my card doesn't support. Trying to put the shadow quality on full lead the game to reset all it's settings to minimum as my card doesn't support it. But it's still a great card, probably the best for the money

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 17:39 - 16

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomD22

My X800XL is amazing, yes. But, you're wrong about nothing using shader 3 yet. I bought Fable for the PC the other day, and it uses shader 3, which my card doesn't support. Trying to put the shadow quality on full lead the game to reset all it's settings to minimum as my card doesn't support it. But it's still a great card, probably the best for the money

Yes I know the X800Xl doesn't support SM3, re-read my post, IT is ATI's new cards the x1300, x1600 and top card x1800 that have shader model 3 incorporated...

TomD22

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

02 Nov 2005 at 17:43 - 17

Quote:

Originally Posted by cannonfodder

Yes I know the X800Xl doesn't support SM3, re-read my post, IT is ATI's new cards the x1300, x1600 and top card x1800 that have shader model 3 incorporated...

Yeah, quite true, but what i was disagreeing with is this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by cannonfodder

Shader model 3 does not make any difference at the minute as there is no games that support it yet

What i said is that actually games do support it already - ie it is the top shadows setting on Fable.

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 17:59 - 18

Fair enough Tom, but 1 game should not decide wether to get an Nvidia or Ati card, yes there are games being developed but most are a fair way from being released, and now ATI have their new range of cards coming out Nvidia dont have the monopoly anymore..

My point was that SM3 is no basis of an argument for nvidia, and now ati have joined in there is more scope for choice.. And not to be detremental to your post 1 game is a pretty weak argument to my post( no i'm not flaming you), I jusy like a good conversation..

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

02 Nov 2005 at 19:29 - 19

Quote:

Originally Posted by cannonfodder

Shader model 3 does not make any difference at the minute as there is no games that support it yet, also the new x1000 sereies if card from ATI all have SM3 enabled...

I have both ATI and nvidia cards, and price v performance wise my x800xl is amazing

EDIT - Nexus8, that blows that argument out of the window

About the argument im a ATI user but i see ATI is falling back on the video industry NVDIA is dominating right now i hope ATI can come back with the new card or new SLI i dunno the 7800 GTX blows the X850 away by miles performance wise and there is a 6800 with 512mb and there SLI technology as i was saying the new shader model one of the games that suport the new shader model is AoE3, FEAR even the the 6600 series suports it to and u can see a really big differance graphic wise i saw the pictures on another thread the lighting looks more realistic and the new HL2 Lost coast uses it to that game has mind blowing light effects. Ill search the thread and post it u can really see a big difference.
Ok here are the images to suport my argument

And yea Cannon there games that suport it and u can really see a diferance and its not just about the new Shader Model 3 the 7800 is way better performance wise and graphic wise

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 20:18 - 20

Yep I know Nexus, I have a 7800gtx, and a x800xl, and an old 6800gt, I have no doubt shader model 3 makes it look better, but the new x1800xt by ati, which is due out this month here in the UK, a bit faster than the 7800gtx and it has SM3.

All I'm saying is that nvidia does not have the monopoly it once had

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

02 Nov 2005 at 20:23 - 21

Yea i hope ATI can come back something to compete with the SLI havent checked the new cards from ATI

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 20:34 - 22

Well i'm not so sure how good Crossfire is going to be from ATI, however unlike sli where the cards hace to be identical, in crossfire it doesn't, so you can have say 1 top of the range card, and one lesser, now that to me is a great idea, although it doesn't convince me yet, so I think nvidia my be the daddies on that score, but if ATI get crossfire to work as they say it will, 2 x1800xt's would be a whole lot faster than 2 7800gtx's in sli, though the normal joe public wont be able to afford £1000 or so for 2 graphics cards.. But as we all know this war will never end

Well the new x1800xt's arrive in the uk nov28th, one site has some x1800xl's in stock, but at £470 a shot, is a bit excessive, especially when I forked out £400 for my 7800

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

02 Nov 2005 at 20:53 - 23

will x1800 be better than 7800 havent checked those new cards

cannonfodder

Tech Monkeh Mod

Join Date: May 2005

Good Old North East of England

Mo/Me

02 Nov 2005 at 21:10 - 24

The top of the range one x1800xt will a bit faster than the 7800gtx, the specs for the ati card are roughly core at about 650 mhz and the memory about 1.5ghz, plus a new way the memory controller works(though I dont understand this fully yet), so on raw grunt ati is a bit more powerful, considering the new ati card only has 16 pixel pipelines compared to 20 on the 7800gtx(although it in reality its still only 16)

TopGun

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2005

02 Nov 2005 at 21:22 - 25

Quote:

Originally Posted by eloshuayeshu

I am trying to decide wether to buy a 6600GT 128MB (faster) or a 6600 256MB (more memory).

My question is really specific to guild wars and no other game. Which card would offer me the best looking graphics when playing GW.

Right now I am running GW on a Geforce2 MX (hard to believe, but true). Both cards will run better than the MX but I am leaning to the 128. Please correct my logic: if my CPU can push the MX to run (well enough), coupled with the fast GPU on the 6600GT 128, GW should fly and have the same graphic quality of a 6600 256.

Which card will make GW look the "coolest"?

I went through this, and after an examination of the benchmarks, the GT model is a far better card- you can do a google and look for the stats. The 6600GT 128MB is probably the best bang you can get for your buck as far as video cards.

But GW isn't that graphically intensive, anyway.

Buy the 6600GT 128MB, don't even hesitate.

The Son Of Morgoth

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Oct 2005

Maryland

The Servants Of Morgoth

N/

03 Nov 2005 at 05:32 - 26

LOL im using an intel like 900gl 128 graphics card or something with 1gig ram and gw runs max details for me without prob...how is this?

dont feel no pain

Forge Runner

Join Date: Sep 2005

Uk,Wales

03 Nov 2005 at 07:14 - 27

because in my opinion ram = speed i used to have a 64 mb radeon 7000(very old) and 256 ram and it was ----! but then i updated my graphic card to a 256Mb radeoan 9550 and itwas stilll realy realy slow to in the end i bought anotehr 256 mb ram chip to pyt in the 2nd slot that would make my total ram 512mb and it works a treat now.

Achilles_Lord

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Oct 2005

Canada

God Killers

W/Mo

03 Nov 2005 at 07:15 - 28

i dont know.. but i wish i had something a little more powerful.. i have everything on lowest and it lags like hell.. time to invest in a new computer

NeXuS8

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

Wild Bladez

W/Mo

03 Nov 2005 at 16:27 - 29

Go with AMD 64 at least 3000+ and at least a gig of ram new games are coming out need high specs like HL 2 Lost Coast that shit rec like AMD 3500+ 1 gig RAM and NVDIA 6800 AT X850 min specs to run it

Josh

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Oct 2005

England, UK

D/Mo

03 Nov 2005 at 17:12 - 30

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeXuS8

Go with AMD 64 at least 3000+ and at least a gig of ram new games are coming out need high specs like HL 2 Lost Coast that shit rec like AMD 3500+ 1 gig RAM and NVDIA 6800 AT X850 min specs to run it

Heh, good good, because I funnily enough, I'm buying an AMD Athlon 64 (Venice) 3.5GHz processor and upgrading from 768 to 1024MB RAM.