Radeon 3850 256mb or 512mb?

[teqvet]

So ATI released a 512mb version shortly after I bought the 256mb version for my brother in law. I'm looking at getting the card now for myself, but was wondering what the differences would be with the 256 and 512? It's only 20$ more right now. 179 vs 199.

[saphalline]

The 512MB version is better. As we move further and further into DX10 gaming, 512MB on your vid card is going to become a requirement and not just a recommendation. That's why all the high-end DX10 vid cards have at least 512MB on them! ;)

[teqvet]

Well lets go off of this then, given that info. My current PC I'm using is a Dell 9100, I'll get ya the specs in a second, but given that I am currently on a PC using XP, with no intentions of getting a new PC/OS until next summer, would the 256mb be the best thing to work with? In 8 months, I'd assume a) new cards would be outperforming at that value then and b) that well the card would just be antiquated by then.

specs: (I think it is dual core)

Processor
Manufacturer Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz
Clock Speed 3GHz
Manufacturer Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz
Clock Speed 3GHz

Memory
Available Memory 69.62 %
Page File Size 1.7851Mb
Available Page File 16433 %
Virtual Memory 2047.8Mb
Available Virtual Memory 97.98 %
Memory Slot 1 [DIMM_1] 512Mb
Memory Slot 2 [DIMM_3] 512Mb
Memory Slot 3 [DIMM_2] 512Mb
Memory Slot 4 [DIMM_4] 512Mb

Storage
Drive Type Drive Size Total Available Space Used Space
C: NTFS 145.3Gb 28.90Gb 116.3Gb
F: FAT32 111.7Gb 38.72Gb 73.03Gb

Hardware
Type Description
DVD/CD-ROM Drives SONY DVD-ROM DDU1615
SONY CD-RW CRX217E
Disk Drives SAMSUNG HD160JJ 149.0Gb
ST312002 6A USB Device 111.7Gb
Display Adapters NVIDIA GeForce 6800 256Mb
Floppy Disk Drives (Standard floppy disk drives) Floppy disk drive
IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers Intel(R) 82801GB Ultra ATA Storage Controllers - 27DF
Primary IDE Channel
Intel(R) 82801GR/GH SATA AHCI Controller
Keyboards USB Human Interface Device
Mice and Other Pointing Devices USB Human Interface Device
Monitors Plug and Play Monitor - (Standard monitor types)
Sound Devices SB Live! 24-bit
USB Controllers Intel(R) 82801GB USB Universal Host Controller - 27C8
Intel(R) 82801GB USB Universal Host Controller - 27C9
Intel(R) 82801GB USB Universal Host Controller - 27CA
Intel(R) 82801GB USB Universal Host Controller - 27CB
Intel(R) 82801GB USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 27CC

[saphalline]

Well it's not like a major purchasing decision here. We're talking about $20 here! A tiny 11% price increase for twice the RAM on your vid card! That's nothing! Not compared to the original GeForce 8800 GTS debate, where the 640MB version was 50% more money than the 320MB version. It's not that much more money.

Besides that, even a game like Crysis is going to benefit from the extra vid card RAM, regardless of the WinXP/DX9c vs Vista/DX10 debate. While it's true that the Vista/DX10 combo gets you better visuals out-of-the-box, it's also true that Crysis uses a lot of power, period! The extra RAM for a mere $20 is going to be well worth it for gaming in general. I just use the DX10 metric as a level of capabilities for future games - every DX10 game in existence is going to be playable on WinXP/DX9c for the next year at least. Probably even longer than M$'s support for the old thing...

[saphalline]

P4's are HyperThreaded. Not true dual-core, but definitely better than single-core. For the purposes of gaming, it's kind of like 1.3 CPU's.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

[teqvet]

Understood, I just didn't want to have an issue of "too much video memory". Not sure if that's possible or not, but I have read in a few posts on various forums where too much memory could cause a bottleneck in some manner, but I did not understand the language as the tech talk was a little above my reading level :)


Thanks again Saph, you're an awesome resource =D

[saphalline]

It's not possible to have "too much video RAM" per se, but there are situations where...

Well, for instance - there are some vid cards that employ a combination of RAM on the vid card and RAM stolen from the system at large. In essence, they become a vid card hybrid; not quite dedicated vid card but not quite onboard video. NVidia's name for this is "TurboCache" while ATI/AMD calls it "HyperMemory". I'm sure you've seen them before. Vid cards that are listed as being 512MB vid cards but only have 128MB on the vid card itself, thus they steal 384MB of main system RAM to make up the difference. Deplorable practice, really. What's the point of spending money on a vid card to replace your onboard video if your main system RAM is still going to be used by the vid card!? It's so stupid!

Another instance is the case of too much RAM for that particular vid card. Ie, the engine can't pull that many seats! :p In the case of weak vid cards, like super-budget sucky-gaming vid cards (GeForce 7300 GS or Radeon X300 SE, etc), it's possible to have so much RAM on the vid card that the GPU itself is not powerful enough to use it all. A 512MB version of a GeForce 7300 GS is an example of this. The gaming performance you'll get out of a puny 7300 GS is so low that the monstrous 512MB of RAM on it does absolutely nothing! It's sort of like adding extra seats to a rusty broken car in a junkyard - being able to seat more people doesn't matter a whit if the car can't move! :rolleyes:

So yes, in certain cases, it's possible to have "too much video RAM" if it is improperly used. Just like any resource. But these are often quite rare in the world of vid cards.

[teqvet]

Regarding PSU's, read some reviews and users claim to run the card of 400w psu's, is there merit in this? 500w is the recommended dosage.

[saphalline]

The PSU requirements for every vid card are cautiously high. Vid card manufacturers cannot be certain of the quality of every PSU that could be powering their products, not to mention the sheer number of components that some people have installed in their systems (such as TV tuner cards, IDE controller cards, multiple optical drives, multiple HDD's, etc). Without any level of certainty, vid card manufacturers list a "minimum" PSU Wattage requirement that is relatively safe for them to claim.

In the case of a system running only one optical drive and one HDD and just two sticks of RAM with a modern energy-efficient dual-core CPU and perhaps a sound card, it's entirely possible that a high quality 400W ATX 3.x PSU can run even a power-hungry vid card like a GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB. But at that point, you're running at the edge of safe limits for stability and clean power. Here on the PCG forums, we're more likely to recommend a high quality and higher Wattage PSU to cover all the bases. Even if it causes people to spend more money, it's "safer" for many many reasons.

[teqvet]

Thanks again. I assume the 450w would power the radeon 3850 512mb card just fine then?

[saphalline]

Oh yeah, no problem.

However, in this day and age of power-hungry components and incredible speed and performance and the ease of upgrading, I would feel much safer recommending a 500W+ unit. High quality, 500W+. I only recommend 450W as a starting point for non-gaming systems.

The money is worth it. Seriously.

[teqvet]

I guess I was/am confused. I thought you were suggesting the 450w psu was better than the 500w because it was 'newer'. I thought it might get extra power/minimize something somewhere or some odd tidbit. I'll go ahead and get the mentioned 500w then for the card. Thanks.


edit: I think I'm mixing my threads together. I am basing my inaccurate assumptions off the statements you made in the Power Supplies: thread.

[saphalline]

It all comes together in the end. ;) Let me know if you want me to re-do it all in one thread.

Well, in this case, the very very slight difference between ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.2 doesn't warrant getting a lower powered PSU when you're already shopping at the Wattage line. ;) If it were the difference between 650W and 700W, I'd say get the newer 650W. But down at the baseline between 450W and 500W, it's a different story.

Ideally, if you had the extra cash, I'd say get the 550W big-brother of that newer 450W PSU. But if that's all you can afford, the "older" 500W will serve you well.

[teqvet]

I'm stuck at that priceline as not only getting the card/psu but also getting a g15. If I held off on the g15, I'd def get a larger PSU. I feel comfortable that it'd run fine, as in the past I've used 350w psu's to power the 6800 or ati1650. I really want a dang g15 though ;p

[PrntRhd]

Saphalline is recommending a better PSU since a less capable one can destabilize an entire PC system.
Sort of like a foundation under a building, you don't see it but it is important to have a good one before building something on it.

[George Hallam]

Get a good PSU and graphics card (HD 3850) and a normal keyboard (cheap $20 thing) and then save for the G15, they are good keyboards :D..

[teqvet]

Ok, we got it all setup and the card is outstanding. He's able tos ee effects in WoW that were never possible before, and the biggest plus, he doesn't lag any more.

One complication we've come across, when I left last night after installation, his sound no longer worked. The device driver says it is still working properly, however when we plug either speakers or headphones in, neither work.

Any idea what I may have screwed up?

[Ajmukon]

ATI unified driver "replaces" sound driver- reinstall the sound driver for his machine and it should work

[teqvet]

I did this, reinstalled the sound driver, with no success. I uninstalled the sound drivers, rebooted, pc identified new hardware, reinstalled on its own, said things were working properly, however no sound is coming out.

[rond36]

Try going to start--> control panel--> sounds and audio devices icon--> click on the audio tab--> in the default playback box make sure that your desired audio device is selected. If it is not selected, select it and choose apply and ok

You may also need to tick the "use only default device" box if the above does not work.

[teqvet]

And if neither of those work? I'm fairly certain I did that, but will try again when I go over there tomorrow.