Any benefit from 1GB graphics card?

I'm getting a new graphics card soon. I noticed that 1024mb cards are becoming more easily available.

Are there any benefits in SL over a 512mb card?

I wouldn't expect much difference in games generally unless I ramp up the resolution but in theory SL should be the exception because of all the textures involved!

I would expect at most a slight improvement. Another warning; increasing the amount of video memory also seems to increase the RAM footprint of the viewer (I think that SL keeps a copy in RAM of every texture that is saved on the video card), so buying a video card with more memory might also require a RAM upgrade to get the full benefit.

Im simplier terms add as much memory as possible........I have 4 giga of ddr2 and a 512 graphic card.

The real advantage in a video card is what chipset it uses, how fast the GPU on it is and how fast and wide the data and memory bus on the card is, not how much memory it has.

If you look at benchmark sites like Tom's Hardware VGA Charts, there is little or no difference because of the memory on otherwise identical cards. (Be careful looking at charts and make sure the GPU and memory bus speeds are the same---often higher memory cards have a faster GPU setting or memory bus.) For example, the 8600GTS comes in identical 256meg and 512meg versions with the same GPU and bus speeds and the difference between the cards is roughly 2.5% in real world results.

Quick answer No.

Longer answer, if you have all eye candy maxed AND have a very long view/render range then perphaps a bit. But then your bottle neck isnt going to be your FX GPU or VRAM but your bandwidth/latiency.

In this case it's between two identical 8800GT cards, one with 512mb memory and the other with 1024mb memory.

So putting everything aside my question relates to just the memory aspect.

If anyone has first hand experience with a 1gb card I'd be interested to hear what you think.

I'll probably get the 512mb version but it's got to the stage where 1024mb cards arent that much extra. So even if it's a small boost it might still be worth it.

With this question I guess I'm thinking along the lines of sims such as malls which are flooded with textures.

Do the benchmarks list the graphics view distance settings? I suspect that with more memory, you'll be able to handle a higher view distance -- provided that you also have enough CPU and network bandwidth to handle it.

I also suspect that it wont hurt much, and eventually, it may help. It seems that we can never get enough of any kind of memory or bandwidth.

I don't think this applies to Second Life.

Most video games will restrict themselves to how much texture memory they use per game level. So if a level only uses 200meg of texture memory then a 256 meg card is going to perform similar to a 512 meg card.

Second Life is different in that there is no restriction set on how much texture memory a sim can use. It's quite possible to find yourself in a sim with over 256 meg of texture data. In this scenario with just a 256 meg video card there's going to be lots of swapping of textures from main memory to video ram which will result in poor performance.

There might be a benefit in running two cards in parallel (say two 256s instead of a 512) .... is this right?

I don't think so. I'm not 100 percent sure but I think each card's memory is mirrored. So you still only have 256 meg of video ram.

Also, if you have a video card with 512 meg and another with 256 meg and run them in SLI mode then you'll still only have 256 meg of video ram in total. It's the same with clock speed - if one card is faster than the other then the faster card will drop its speed to match the slower card.

and I sound like a big freaking nerd so I'm going to shut up already!

If that was true, and assuming the GPUs on the card deal with stuff on that cards memory, what would be the advantage of SLI?

edit: d'oh! I think you're right after all..

Heh heh, with proper programming, one could run their operating system and applications in the one gig of video ram.

I'm seeing an image in my mind of video cards with slots to plug motherboards in.

Wasn't too long ago that if you saw a video card saying it had a gig of memory you'd thing it was a typo.

Maybe if you run 4 copies of SL simultaneously...

Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

One card draws the top half of the screen and the other draws the bottom. Or some are configured to draw alternate lines.

You like it when I talk nerdy?

Then you might be able to literally see all the bugs in Windows.

Yes there is one advantage, more memory runs , multiple versions of SL better, my old 512Mb 7600 runs 2 clients better than my 360Mb 8800

That is correct. You get duel GPU processing more or less. Then your limitations will end up being your CPU, RAM and bandwidth/latiency

Yes there is one advantage, more memory runs , multiple versions of SL better, my old 512Mb 7600 runs 2 clients better than my 360Mb 8800

That might just be the card. My old x850xt 256mb ran multiple copies of SL really well and my 8800GTS 320mb doesn't like multiples at all -- though I can get them to run if I run the program before i log in.

Where are you getting that there's an 8800 GT available with 1024 MB memory? The GT only comes 512 MB, period. The two higher end cards in the GeForce 8 series, the 8800 GTX and the 8800 Ultra, both come with 768 MB of memory. nVidia has no listing whatsoever for a 1024 MB 8800, let alone a GT.

All the cards in the GeForce 8 series are listed at http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce8.html


I don't have a 1 GB card, but I do have two 768 MB cards, for a total of 1.5 GB of video memory. I can tell you they're fantastic. The extra video memory is definitely worth it.

However, there is a catch. If you're running a 32-bit OS (XP or VIsta) then you're limited to 4 GB of total RAM usable by your system. That includes video memory and system RAM combined. So if you're using 1.5 GB of video memory like I am, then your system RAM is limited to 2.5 GB. Even though I've got four 1GB memory sticks in the machine, only 2.5 GB is actually usable, which annoys me.

That's the reason nVidia decided to go with 768 MB for the 8800 instead of 1 GB. If someone were to put two 1GB cards in an XP or Vista 32-bit system, that would be half the total memory allowance right there.

If you run a 64-bit OS, then you can use up to 128 GB of total RAM. Most people aren't doing that though. The 4 GB limit present form most users will continue be the bottle neck restricting video card development for quite a while.

If you're interested, here is a chart showing the minimum and maximum memory limitations for all versions of Vista. http://www.kingston.com/windowsvista/vista_faq.asp


You're thinking the right way, but keep the above mentioned limitations in mind.

Also, max out your system RAM. Memory is so dirt cheap these days, there's no reason not to. Throw 4 GB in there, and just let the video card override whatever of that amount it needs to. If you're using a 512 MB video card, you'll end up with 3.5 GB of usable system RAM.

This is incorrect. Video RAM on the videocard (not shared memory) is not part of the limitations of the OS. The bus and way memory works as it related to 'total memory' is apples and oranges in this regard. If that was the case people who have 4 gigs of RAM (that I know) wouldn't be able to have videocards in their system.

You have another issues with your system (perhaps a BIOS update is needed on your mobo) however the video card is not the issue.

You know, you could try searching on google for "8800gt 1gb" before trying to correct me on that one Gainward make one among others.



You still have less than a single 1GB 8800GT though. Yours will just share the workload with the same 768MB of data that's all (As Meade quoted from wikipedia in this thread).



Yes that's frustrating. I was under the impression Microsoft were going to fix this in a service pack but can't remember if that included XP or just Vista. Might be a small incentive to "upgrade" to Vista if this is the case but otherwise I wont touch it with a barge pole.

I may go for the 1gb version after all. I guess I can always limit how much of it SecondLife uses if the system/software is too dumb to make proper use of it. If it makes texture-mad sims, running multiple clients, or multiple monitors perform better then it'll be worthwhile.

Only thing now is getting my hands on one. 8800GT cards are hot items and don't stay in stock for long.

I was told directly by EVGA, the manufacturer of both my motherboard and my video cards, that the limitation applies to ALL memory in the system, video RAM and system RAM included. This was then confirmed when nVidia told me the same thing. It's also been discussed on the forums here countless times.

Are you saying you know something everyone else doesn't?

Here's an article you might want to read, explaining the problem: http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/23/4gb-memory-problems/

Allow me to quote from it:

--



It didn't occur to me to Google for information that seemed contrary to nVidia's own listed specs. I wasn't aware that their manufacturing partners were allowed to go off spec like that, and add more memory on their own. Interesting.


Incorrect. The two cards are each using their own 768 MB, for a combined total of 1.5 GB.

Your interpretation of Meade's quote is way off the mark. All it said was that in SLI mode, both cards will work together on rendering the same scene. It did not say that the onboard memory of one gets cancelled or overridden by the other in any way. The whole point of having two cards is to double the power. That includes processing power AND memory.

While I have no doubt that you will get good performance from SLI of the fastest video card on the market, I wouldn't necessarily attribute it to the amount of memory on it.

Well it might be better than assuming someone was considering buying something imaginary. It's much easier to show/say that something exists than say something doesnt exist.



Well intuitively it stands to reason that if each card is working on rendering the same/similar scene they'll need to load the same textures into each card's memory, but SLI has more than one mode and it's a complicated subject so I take your word for it. Going a little off topic anyway.

Thanks for the feedback guys.