Performance increase in 128mb-256mb X1600?

The title says it all... Is there any real performance increase in the ATI x1600 when its 128mb or 256mb?

While on the topic of performance increases, would a 2.16Ghz CPU be much faster than a 2.33Ghz CPU?

 

I hear the 128mb version is very crippled. Dont know exact 3Dmark scores but i estimate:

128mb version ~ 2000-2200 points
256mb version - 2800 - 3000 points

The processor increase is very minor tbh. We are talking about taking a few milliseconds off normal operations and only translates to seconds when the processor is on 100% for extended periods which is not very often unless you image/video edit.

The best is the T7200 in terms of price/performance. The Core Duos clock down to save power anyway so spend most of their time underclocked. You cant tell the difference between a T2300 and T7200 for everyday tasks like internet/word.

So to answer your question, yes it is but not by much.

 

If it is that much of a difference, I guess i'll go with the 256mb if the 128 is so bad compared to it... I didn't think it would do that much damage to it, heh. Guess I was wrong?

 

Definitely go for the 256MB version.

 

The 256mb version of the X1600 is much better than the 128mb version.

Get the 256mb version if you can.

 

Actually the 128MB version gets 2800 - 3000 and the 256MB gets 3500 - 4000.

There is definitely a difference between the 128MB and 256MB variants as stated so try to get the 256MB version in order to take advantage of the full power of the X1600. Note that even with only 128MB of memory, the X1600 is still far faster than the Go7400/X1400.

 

Yep, take it from someone who has it, get the 256MB version.

 

Well, the X1600 can certainly use more than 128MB effectively, so your gaming performance will increase. By how much, I am not certain.

But a 2.33GHz processor is at best only 8% faster...for gaming, the GPU is the bottleneck so you'll never notice. Most other applications will not use the extra power, so spend your money on a RAM or HDD upgrade rather than a CPU upgrade.

 

Well, the whole reason I am asking this is because of my Macbook Pro. I bought the 2.33Ghz 15.4" one and I don't know if I regret it, it can play everything that I want, but I didn't know if the xtra $500 I spent for 2.33ghz CPU compared to 2.16, 256mb GPU compared to 128, and 2 gigs of ram as compared to 1 gig was worth it, the main reason I bought it was for the 256VRAM. I was gonna throw in a stick of ram anyway if I did buy the 2.16 tho.

EDIT: I just noticed, I am now a notebook geek.

 

In the MacBook Pro, the 128MB version is not crippled because it has the same 128-bit memory bus as standard 256MB versions. My MBP gets 3928 in 3DMark05. That said, the X1600 does have enough power to benefit from having 256MB of VRAM. Personally I didn't find paying for the 2.33GHz MBP worthwhile since I would essentially be paying only for the extra VRAM since I could get the extra 1GB RAM cheaper and I didn't need the extra speed going from 2.16GHz to 2.33GHz and it would only reduce battery life anyways. I'm not a heavy gamer so I'm satistfied with sticking with the 2.16GHz MBP with 128MB X1600.

 

Exactly, the issue is not the memory, are the bits. Usually (but not always) the x1600 128 MB is 64 bits, and the 256 MB is 128 bits. I guess not in the Macbook pro.

 

As for the CPU upgrade it almost makes no difference, the GPU being the bottleneck as usual.

 

D'oh! I least i got the ranges right though

 

This is slowly changing mujtaba. I would argue in the next generation of RTS games, the CPU will bottleneck well before the GPU gets stressed. The reason is, games like Supreme Commander will not render to the screen anything not in the focus area, and since you tend to zoom out a lot during RTS games anyway, your GPU will not have much to do while the CPU is chugging numbers for the thousands of units on the playing field. In SupCom when you zoom out, your units become 2D icons.

First person shooters will remain GPU bound, of course.

 

I know about this, since the AI must keep track of things when it's not in focus and it's also the physics that is done on the GPU for many machines.Also it's the CPU that discards the unwanted geometry [the parts that are not in focus].It's just the fact that I don't know when this will happen.

 

But for RTS, not for FPS.