512MB vs 256MB on the 8600 GTS equals a waste of money.

Posted By: Steve McBarnes - 11:18:25 Mon, September 10, 2007

[H]ard|OCP has a new article up comparing three 8600 GTS cards. The Evga Superclocked 512MB version, the stock Evga 512MB version and the stock Nvidia 256MB version. They tested 5 popular games and found that they were unable to increase any settings in any of the games because of the increased memory size. Even I was surprised at how little difference there is between the three cards. If you wondering if more memory on your 8600 GTS will be worth it, read this article please.

« Back

5 Comments

Monday, September 10, 2007 2:40:07 PM

Even on the 8600 GTS? That's about as good as an X1950 Pro, and I know 512MB does some good for the X1950XT.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:02:57 AM

anonymousD
n00b

wait. so a 7900 or a x1950pro will benefit from 512 but not the gts? must be teh crappy 128bit bus at play..or could it be the gpu itself unable of delivering? i doubt its drivers...altough u never know.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 4:05:44 AM

anonymous
guest

Can't do much with a 128 bit bus, no matter how much memory you have.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 2:30:44 PM

anonymousD
n00b

i think the x1600 series, as weak as they are, show a little bit of improvement with more ram. and those are 128 bit too. maybe [H] shouldve tried finer settings?

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 5:55:22 PM

Radiator
Senior Member

The card itself doesn't have the power to utilize 512MB .

Add Comment

This is a moderated comment list. All posts are subject to my personal approval. Please limit your comments to the subject of the article. Don't (for example) start asking questions about your video card here, you'll get a much better response in the forums.

Anonymous posts are allowed, but I encourage you to sign up for the forums and post comments under your name.