Performance difference between 16M and 32M?

[aaroncgi]

Anyone know the difference between the 16M and 32M version of the G400 dual head are in terms of performance? I know max 3D resolutions with the 16M are limited to 1280 x 1024, but I doubt I'll feel the need to run higher than that. Who knows, never had a game that had that option!

Aaron

[machow]

i had a 16mb g400 sh which i ran into problems and changed it to 32mb max. while i still had the 16mb card, i benchmarked it and found that the performance is quite the same of my old gigabyte ga-630 16 sgram voodoo banshee. when i changed it to max things are totally different. performance doubled. i strongly suggest that you pruchase 32mb versions. in order to view 1024*768 resolution on your computer, you need at least 2mb of video memory. if you are going to judge amount of memory you want by the resolution you want alone, why don't you buy a 2mb video card? :P hehe. just kidding.

[Indiana]

I've got a G400 16 MB DH. I bought this model cause at that time the price difference between the 16MB and 32 MB versions was quite high ($50 while the difference between the 16MB SH and the 16 MB DH was only about $20).
DualHead functionality (don't forget: you also get a very sharp TV-OUT on the DH versions) together with 2D/3D image quality was a major argument for the G400, otherwise I would probably have bought the V3/3000.

In all normal benchmarks I can easily achieve or beat the results that are posted for the 32MB version in tests or in this forum.
The card overclocks quite well and is stable up to 165 core/205 mem giving a score of nearly 3200 in 3DMark2k's default benchmark or ~33 fps in Q3 high-quality at 1024 (Athlon600@630).

I think that you'll normally only notice a speed-difference if you go higher than 1024x768x32. Only in Quake3 things get choppy when you turn texture detail to max in 1024x768x32 - I guess this is because then a lot of textures have to be transferred over the AGP bus.

So, if you don't want to run 3D-games in higher resolutions than 1024x768x32 - and most newer titles are IMHO too slow in higher resolutions even on a MAX - and there is a significant difference in price between the 16/32MB model, you'll be fine with the 16MB one.

P.S.: it could be worth to look at the actual card: Some of the non-MAX models have 5ns SGRAM, while most others have 6ns SGRAM and some OEM 16 MB models are said to even have only SDRAM.

[aaroncgi]

Thanks for the info Indiana, lots of good stuff! According to Matrox, the only G400s which may have SDRAM are the single head versions. I think I'd probably be happy with the 16M version, especially if I overclock it as you have done. The price difference isn't as much anymore though, $25-30, so I'll still do a little thinking. Wish the Dual Head didn't cost so much, you can get a G400 SH 16M for only $80! ATI's Rage Fury Pro 32M is down to $70 now too, damn that's tempting as performance is just slightly under the G400, but I WANT Dual Head.

Aaron

[Livius]

Do not bother to buy a 32mb version if you think you have something better to do with the money. I had two MAXes, one normal 32mb and two 16mb cards. The 16mb is, performancewise, just as just good as the normal 32mb in resolutions of 800x600x32 or 1024x768x16. In 1024x768x32 you might sense a small difference depending on the game textures. And it overclocks well (MAX settings are generally attainable). So if you’re not an avid gamer (if you are, btw, buy a geforce) and if you do not run 2 monitors or one monitor at insane resolutions, a 16mb will be just fine.

[MadCat]

machow seems to attribite his performance gains to the extra memory when in fact the gain in performance was because the 32mb MAX has a core speed 24MHz higher than his old 16mb card.

The 32mb vanilla G400 performs the same as the 16mb vanilla. Of course, you might have to turn down texture detail a single notch in Quake3, no big deal.

------------------
This Signature Space FOR SALE / RENT

[DarkSyd]

You will notice a huge difference in games with lots of textures. Trying to play Everquest on the 16mb card was maddening. Switched to 32 and it was like an entirely different game. There's such a small difference in price between the two right now, you may as well get the 32.

[mdhome]

Hello Aaron
I have both the 16 meg and 32meg versions of the standard g400 and have found that in games like UT and Quake3 the machine with the 16 meg card *stutters* more often whilst it loads textures into the cards memory.


regards Michael