PDA

View Full Version : GF4 Ti 64mb Vs. 128mb !!


Dirty
09-24-03, 04:36 PM
whats the difference between geforce 4 ti 4200 64 mb version & 128 mb version.

will it make any difference in performance ??

:confused:

john19055
09-24-03, 04:40 PM
On most of the 128mb versions of the TI4200 it has slower memory than the 64mb versions.They both have the same core speed.

Dirty
09-24-03, 04:43 PM
will it cause problem is newer games due to 64 mb of memory ?

StealthHawk
09-24-03, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by Dirty
will it cause problem is newer games due to 64 mb of memory ?

Games coming out will definitely use more than 64MB of video memory. Doom3 will use more. I'm not really sure how many games out right now need more than 64MB of RAM. You definitely need it at high resolutions with FSAA(such as 1280 and above). Of course if you are buying such a card now I doubt you have the intention of using such settings.

It's probably a fair bet that the more graphically intense games of today and tomorrow use more than 64MB.

micronX
09-24-03, 06:38 PM
I bought the 64mb Ti4200 because it was only $80 bucks. It clocks higher then my friends 128mb version, but on a few of my UT2K3 CTF maps, I run out of texture memory fast. Get a 128mb card if you can.

Fahim
09-26-03, 01:42 AM
64MB Ti 4200 - 250/500 Core/Mem, 8.0GB/Sec Bandwidth
128MB Ti 4200 - 250/444 Core/Mem, 7.10GB/Sec Bandwidth

eesa
09-26-03, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by Dirty
will it cause problem is newer games due to 64 mb of memory ?

one specific case. In JKII, if you use "very high" as the texture setting, it won't fit in the 64mb frame buffer. Here, the 128mb version will be quite a bit faster. But in most cases, the 64 is still faster.

B&R
09-26-03, 06:13 PM
yes it would so get a ti4200 128mb.

theultimo
09-26-03, 07:24 PM
My 128MB helps out a lot not just in PC games, but like a PSX emulator I use, where the extra memory is used for filtering and super hi-res textures.

Get a 128MB, its a bit more "feature proof" i guess...

stncttr908
09-26-03, 10:13 PM
I could never understand why nvidia did this. You either had to choose half the memory and higher clock speeds, or more memory and lower clocks. Why not have the 128MB act as an "Ultra" version of sorts and give the user more mem and higher clocks? ATI is pulling the same crap with the Radeon 9600 256MB. Put 256MB of memory on the friggin' Pro, not the lower clocked and overall much slower model just to sell cards.

ricercar
09-26-03, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by stncttr908
I could never understand why nvidia did this. You either had to choose half the memory and higher clock speeds, or more memory and lower clocks.

Bzzt. NVIDIA isn't responsible: a card's manufacturer makes the decision what RAMs to use: ASUS, MSI, Gainweard, PNY, BFG, etc..

yoladude
09-27-03, 02:22 AM
the biggest difference is that the 64 meg cards typically come with 3.6ns ram, which equates to (i think) 550mhz effective speed. the 128meg cards typically come with 4ns memory (like mine) which equates to 500 mhz speed. personally, mine was 4ns, but had updated bios to run at 513 mhz (very hot tho). some 128meg cards also had faster ram, look into it.

i'd recommend the 128meg card, it can be oc'ed past 64meg stock memory speeds in many cases, and the extra texture memory will help a lot. trust me, i have one :)

Smokey
09-28-03, 06:03 AM
Doesnt anyone remember Pellys review (http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/gf4_ti_4200_shootout/page_7.shtml) ?

Even without the use of FSAA, the 128mb is as fast as the 64mb, add FSAA to the mix and there is no question which is better.

I still have a 64mb GF3 and it runs my games fine, although I know 128mb would be better. Next card I get, around Christmas, will hopefully have 256mb.