Im trying to figure out how much of a difference in performance the BFG 7900 gt oc 512mb will compare to the xfx 7900 gt 520m xtreme 256mb. Here is the stats i know:
XFX 7900 GT 520M Xtreme
Memory: 256 MB
Memory Clock: 1500 MHz
Core Clock: 520 Mhz
Price: $380 CND
BFG 7900 GT OC
Memory: 512 MB
Memory Clock: 1360 MHz
Core Clock: 475 MHz
Price: $444 CND
So overall there is a price difference of $64 CND ($57 USD). Will there be a big enough performance increase to justify the money?
That’s a tough one right there. You get higher clockspeeds for $64 cheaper with the XTX but you get the 512Mb’s with the BFG. But since it’s dead simple to overclock you’re video card I guess I’d point towards the 512 BFG just for future proofing. I mean you’ll likely have this card awhile so it’s best to get the one that’s the most likely to keep up with the times. Clock speeds are easily fixed, lack of memory isn’t obviously. It’s you’re money but I think it’s worth the extra $64 in the long run. BFG is also concidered the better brand as far as heatsink quality and software bundles go.
Like Exfoliate said its a tough one. In my opinon you wont see any difference between the two at the moment. There are currently very few games out that would totally max out either of those two cards. Even when you do play a game that is a struggle the extra video memory wouldnt really make too much of a difference. Only when playing games on high detail & high levels of AA does the extra video memory come into play.
So I would say save a bit of dosh and go for the 256mb.
Edit - The only other thing that you should think about is which has the better cooler?
I agree with what you’ve said more of less but with game’s like Doom 3 and Quake 4 that utilize over 500Mb’s of video memory when set to Ultra it is naturally going to help to have that much actual memory onboard rather than relying on the slower access of system memory. Granted these games run fine on 256MB cards provided you have 256MB’s of vram and a gig of system ram but my point is there will come a time (for instance when games running the Unreal 3 engine come out in 2007) that that extra 256Mb’s or ram could me the difference between setting the game on low to setting it to medium or whatever. Just due to all the extra shaders, high res textures, and splashy effects and all.
I have the 7800GTX and the 7900GT is faster than that and I have no problems playing any games at the moment maxed out (BF2, Quake 4, Prey etc).
With future games I think it will be the core speed that will limit the cards and stop it from playing games on high settings, if this is the case than the extra video memory would never be utilised.
i believe that the BFG 7900 is actually a 7900 GTX, because the gt line has 256, while the GTX line has 512, From what i’ve read and the benchmarks i’ve seen, the GTX’s are actually a good amount better, especially when SLI enabled. Honestly i would go the route of eVGA for your graphics solution.
Well…thanks for the info. Ill take all this into consideration and im going to hunt around for some prices too. I think i might end up going for the gtx instead…some good discounts on them right now.
I don’t think the corespeed will be the real factor. Pipelines, shader counts, and architecture efficiency will likely outweigh clockspeed alone.
yeah i would have to go with what exfoliate said for the performance, as wel as memory clock speed, anyways the GTX is just the better choice.
Boys, this is a prime example of what I’ve been talking about in other threads. Right now you do not need 512MB of video ram. Video cards are more dependent on how quickly information can be read and transmitted then what the storage information is. For this reason alone, the bandwidth should be the primary concern.
Though GTXs have 512MB of onboard ram, they also have 1600MHz memory clock speeds and 600MHz core clock speeds — the BFG is not even close so it is a GT. GTs usually have 1320MHz memory clocks and 450MHz core clocks.
XFXs overclock their boards so we know why the speeds are higher then what they should be, all BFG did was basically slab on some more memory (a marketing trick to get you to buy). I’d go with the XFX, wait I did, and mine will be here Friday.
But let’s not forget… if you are upgrading your video card and not planning to do it again within a year, I’d hold off. DirectX 10 is right around the corner and that will be a better buy - prices are dropping for a reason. I’m getting the 7900GT XFX because it’s cheap and I need a decent PCIe x16 card for the time being, but I am upgrading to DirectX 10 as soon as it comes out (otherwise I would get the 7950gx2). But if I had the choice between the XFX or the BFG, I would choose the XFX hands down. Even if you could OC the BFG, why couldn’t you just overclock the XFX too? The XFX will have the faster speeds and higher bandwidth no matter what.
Ex, after all we’ve talked about, I’m surprised you suggested the more memory. tsk tsk.
Vol7ron what are you talking about
What are you talking about!?! If you have questions, reread what I wrote. It’s simple:
WRONG. It’s a slightly (very slightly) overclocked GT with more ram. If it could reach speeds of a GTX, then yes it could overclock to a GTX, but I’m guessing it can’t (at least w/o proper cooling).
Stop playing the RAM numbers game and start paying attention to the bandwidth.
Here’s an article right here:
BFG 7900GT OC Video Card
Says the XFX and the BFG were about the same, but the XFX was a little better, which elaborates my point.
Well…i had a look through eBay…and found a new XFX 7900 GTX EE Overclocked…about the price of the BFG 7900 GT… Anyways, this one overclocked version of the gtx (faster clock speeds & that exta memory to boot) None the less…how much of a difference will the DX10 cards make? Will this gtx im getting be relatively useless in a year or so? (as far as getting those cool effects)
I see you’re point Vol7ron but I don’t think he’ll be buying a DX 10 card anytime soon, which is why he wants a foward thinking, powerful card now. I he planned on keeping his card awhile I think he’d find that the extra memory, in time really did make a difference.
True example. I bought my 6800 in April 2005. Then it was concidered pretty good, even with 128Mb’s of ram. System requirements still frequently listed a 32Mb card as being the minimum, rather than 64. I could crank things like FarCry, UT2k4, GTA SA, Doom 3, Chronicles of Riddick, Medal of Honor: Pacific Assult, etc. No later on down the read I’ve resorted to tweaking my card just to get any last bit of performance out of it. I’ve unlocked an extra vertex shader, and 4 pixel pipelines and oc’d my core/mem speeds as well as my CPU. But I have to face reality a 128Mb card can’t keep up in a world that’s moved on to 256Mb. To point is what do you think 2007 will be like? I may of course be wrong but I wouldn’t doubt for a second that a 512Mb card will be concidered a pretty necessary addition if you intend to crank those settings at high resolutions.
I realize that clockspeeds are important but when your computer has to resort to using your system memory to make up for lack of vram there’s a probablem. Depends on the game I guess.
I still don’t think it’s worth it. If that’s your reason, I’d hold of and wait for the 7950 to drop in a little bit of price. That way you can get your 1GB of ram and higher clock speeds.
If there comes a time where the XFX can’t do it, you can always get another and SLI it. By then it should be a lot cheaper.
But if you keep saying that to yourself your not going to go anywhere…you cant keep holding off and waiting for price drops.
This is why people think Canadians are ignorant. And me saying so is why everyone else thinks Americans are cocky.
You obviously don’t have a sense of economics or of how the technology cycle works. If price drops happened every other day, that’d be true, but it’s not. Would you agree that lower priced cards are based off the higher end cards? Well you better, because higher end cards do not get their price based on what lower priced cards are selling at. Higher priced cards get their price from a number of things (how well it performs, what the availability of the product is, how long until the next best thing comes out, etc).
If you evaluated (or graphed) the performance of the top performing graphics cards (along the y-axis) over how long it is regarded as the best performer (x-axis), the chart would look like an upward stair step. These are what we call step charts. Its because the top performer becomes available, then it holds its rank as “top performer” for a period of time (horizontal line) then a new one comes out. Now for the purposes of simplicity I am just concentrating on a certain chip designer (ATI or nVidia) and grouping all manufacturers into the same category (eVGA, XFX, BFG, etc) so that there is not a preference for one over the other.
Anyhow, this being said, it’s hard to determine when the new chips are going to come out. Without some bit of press release and a some effort of research on your end, you’re just left to knowing what stores tell you (and what they sell you). Therefore it’s hard to determine when price cuts will be. But if you’re bargain hunting you want to buy a product as soon as it’s price has gone down (right around the time when a new product comes out). This way you get more performance life for your dollar.
Now, I could go more into the specifics of the matter, but I am opting not to as I have already typed too much and I’m afraid I would lose some of you. Not to mention, I’m being lazy in the morning. All you have to keep in mind is that DirectX 10 is coming out, so if you’re going to get a DirectX 9 card, prices will continue to fall if the chip manufacturer doesn’t intend on releasing a ROM update.
Once prices do fall they will generally stay this way (in the same ballpark) for a length of time and then fall again as more new technology is introduced to the market.
As a short response to what dabomb said: yes you can wait for price drops, but you have to be smart about it.
Vol7ron first off no one is playing a memory game, i’m not sure where your getting that, secondly, i didn’t realize that BFG made a 7900 gt with 512 memory i thought GTX’s were the only cards with the 512 vram. Also all the way down to 7600 that i know of will support DX10, they say so with the cards, or at least i know of with eVGA, i’d imagine its the same for the other manufactures as well. Then if they don’t they could release a driver or possibly a card bios update, that beside the point. The other thing, Vista recommends a card with 256 of memory so the 512 isn’t a bad idea, but yes the XFX does have better specs and would probably be the better choice for gaming. Although i would recommend a GTX series 7900 anyways because its about the same price a better performace and cooling. Last point Exfoliate makes very good points.
Why thank you:)