# How do I know which graphics card is better?



## XP1 (Aug 25, 2005)

What do I need to know in order for me to compare graphics cards effectively?

Is the RAM of a graphics card better in judgement or is the GPU?
What other components do I need to take into consideration?
What other factors do I need to consider when comparing?

Example, how would I compare these two graphics cards:
NVIDIA 7600 GS 512MB AGP
NVIDIA 7800 GS 256MB AGP


----------



## lwdarkwolf07 (Jun 12, 2007)

Okay. First of all. the memory size. theres the 256mb, and the 512mb. Also, look at both core clock and memory clock frequencies. Just look them up by typing the name in a search bar and find the specs. higher core and memory clocks= more FPS


----------



## Triple6 (Dec 26, 2002)

Higher clock speeds don't necessarily mean its going to be faster. There's many other factors like if the memory interface is 128 bit versus 256 bit and so on.

Best way to compare is to look at benchmarks, looking at plain numbers can be deceptive.

Here's one good site with an interactive comparison: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=717&model2=715&chart=275
It has the 7600GS and the 7800GT, the GT being slightly faster then a GS version but you get the picture and see how the 7600 with the higher GPU speed gets beat by the 7800GT with a higher GPU clock speed. And for the Geforce 7600's and 7800's the difference between 256MB and 512MB is very small.

FYI, the 7800GS is better then the 7600GS.


----------



## AdamInc (May 26, 2006)

http://www.gpureview.com/ this site will give you a good idea usually


----------



## 3GMusic (Jun 16, 2007)

Hi there - I'd like to interject a thought, if I may. The raw specs and benchmarks seem rather straightforward, but what about the specs as applied to the intended application? 

From what I gather, the gamers are always on the cutting edge of video display technologies, and most articles and reviews that I've seen tend to equate video performance with gaming. This is fine, and I've seen some amazing CGI work.

But I'm not a gamer - I'm looking for a card that will look better and work faster than my current card. 

Along with mainstream MS Office apps, I work with graphics-oriented programs like Fireworks, Flash, Photoshop, etc., as well as some video editing and music production.

I've been told that I wouldn't realize much benefit from getting a hi-end card because I don't work with 3D, games, the need to generate polyhectagonistidronical shapes, etc....

But I've gotta do SOMETHING - I mean, I ran a 3DMark series on my ATI Radeon X550 system and when I uploaded results to get a comparison, it was as though everyone in the entire world has a better system than I! I mean- you see these huge numbers for the good systems, then this measley little piss-ant number with the label "YOU" next to it. Absolutely humiliating!

Another reason I'm looking is that since I got a Dell 2407WFP monitor, it's done some weird stuff and I'm wondering if my video card is just getting overwhelmed. 

I can't see spending mega bucks for feature benefits I'll never see - but which ones ARE things that would make a difference to a Mr. Regular Guy?

It would be interesting to know to which measurements relate to which practical experiences. 

At any rate, carry on - these forums are great education!

-3G


----------



## brite750 (Mar 16, 2002)

3GMusic said:


> Hi there - I'd like to interject a thought, if I may. The raw specs and benchmarks seem rather straightforward, but what about the specs as applied to the intended application?
> 
> From what I gather, the gamers are always on the cutting edge of video display technologies, and most articles and reviews that I've seen tend to equate video performance with gaming. This is fine, and I've seen some amazing CGI work.
> 
> ...


3D mark is strictly a BM for gamers, buying a gamer card will probably not benifit you with the apps you mentioned. Mr regular guy probably doesnt need a card costing much more than $100 to $150 and thats if he want to get fancy. Now with Vista to run it with full graphics you may need a better card. Some of my pcz have nothing fancy at all and they work fine, 1 pc has a ATI9500pro-128 and the other has a FX5200-128, mine has a 6600GT-128 only because my son went with a new MB that needed pci-e16x.
I run AutoCAD 3D solid modeling at home and the card works well but I have been toying with the idea of getting a QuadroFX1000 workstation card for $100 at Compuvest, it would come with app specific drivers for AutoCAD that would allow me to run the card with hardware accelleration turned on like the one I have at work, but the 6600GT isnt bad.


----------

