IFL90 DDR2 vs. DDR3 benches

Note these are desktop cards, one is 512 mb ddr2 and one is 256mb ddr3, the performance increase for the ddr3 card seems to be minimal. http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&number=9&artpage=2937&articID=630
Also, the ddr2 one is the equivalent of a stable overclocked 8600m gt, the ddr3 model also has increased core. DDR2-540/500, DDR3-540/700.

 

Yup, it is minimal. Not worth of spending extra bucks.

 

Plus. The extra 256mb of vram MUST do something.

Like in games that are like. "do not enable this setting unless you have 2 gigs of ram and at least 512 memory on your graphics card."

 

ColonelSanders14
The DDR2 version has clocks 540(older 475)/400, not 500.

But the differences are not big 5-10%. DDR2 has more aggressive timings on its side. It would be even smaller, but unfortunately 8600 from the very start was suffering from memory bandwidth problem, 128bit memory pipe is too small, so the performance scaling with incising memory speed is almost linier.

 

Well, I belive that 8600 GT with 256 MB DDR-3 is better than one with 512 MB DDR-2...
And i don't think that 8600 GPU can use whole 512 MB...More than 256 but not whole 512.
It's mid-range, not hi-end GPU.

 

When you go higher resolution with gaming.... more RAM helps.

 

I agree, but you can't play last generation of games on native WSXGA+ resolution, probably not even on WXGA with 8600GT GPU.
More GRAM helps, but not that much I think...

 

The cards in this review are desktop cards, and thats what they are clocked are clocked at. I thought I should put that to clear any confusion. The ddr3 8600m gt is better, but only expensive notebooks have them, and its not really worth the money IMO.

 

only when the GPU can keep up, NVIDIA reference design has the good amount of the memory onboard, with little use for more.

The 8600 GT at 256Mb is as fast as any 512Mb model, because you need high resolutions AA/AF options to make a difference and at those settings the GPU can't keep up. Same goes with 8800 GT 1gb cards and any other card using more memory than NVIDIA/ATI reference model.

The only reason companies are selling VGA cards with more memory than default is to trick customers into paying more, as A LOT of people STILL relate MEMORY size = VGA Speed.

That trend has died over 10 years ago, it's true that in the PCI (not PCI express) days, 2D VGA cards with MORE memory indeed had better performance, and you could run higher resolutions etc. But as soon as the first 3D accelerated cards hit the market, the importance of memory has been linked to the GPU speed, something 2D cards did not have. So yes the early Voodoo cards with 4mb were slower than those with more memory, but only in games at higher resolution.

Now we are at 512Mb on reference mid-range products (HD3870 & 8800GT) and the situation has changed, doubling the onboard memory doesn't increase speed, so why do companies keep putting out products? Because old habits die hard. people keep on buying the 7300 GT with 1gb over the 8600 GT with 256Mb, because they think that video memory defines speed.

 

So having an 8600gt 512 over a 256mb version is no advantage?