1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Sapphire x1950 pro ultimate & 512MB

Discussion in 'ATI' started by Kent Smith, Feb 22, 2007.

  1. Kent Smith

    Kent Smith Guest

    I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    have a 512MB for about the same price.

    I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    that be correct?

    Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the advantages/disadvantages?
    The only difference I can see in the specs is the memory clock runs 200MHz
    faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070

    Leaning towards the ultimate as it's been around a bit longer and tends to
    have better consumer reviews but this could just be because there are more
    of them. :)



    -KENT
     
    Kent Smith, Feb 22, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Kent Smith

    Clas Mehus Guest

    On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:25:09 +1300, "Kent Smith"
    <> wrote:

    >I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    >have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >
    >I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    >size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    >that be correct?


    If the memory speed is the same, the performance in most cases will be
    the same. There might be some differences in very high resolutions,
    but the board at the same time don't have the performance to use such
    high resolutions.

    >Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the advantages/disadvantages?
    >The only difference I can see in the specs is the memory clock runs 200MHz
    >faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    >http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    >http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070


    No, not overclocked. Since the 256 MB version has faster memory, it
    will in general be faster than the 512 MB version.

    512 MB on a board in this segment is a marketing tricks in most
    situations.

    I personally havn't tested the 1950Pro in 256 vs 512, but have done it
    with the X1900XT, which is "about the same" -- in general not much of
    a difference.


    --
    Clas Mehus
    - "Den som har flest prylar när han dör vinner..."
     
    Clas Mehus, Feb 22, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kent Smith

    First of One Guest

    The 256 MB "Ultimate" will run faster in almost all games due to the
    higher-clocked memory, so get that one.

    Be aware the screw heads on the back of the Ultimate's Zalman cooler stick
    out more than usual. If the two PCIe x16 slots on your motherboard are
    separated by just one slot, you won't be able fit two of these cards in
    Crossfire.

    --
    "War is the continuation of politics by other means.
    It can therefore be said that politics is war without
    bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

    "Kent Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:erl58e$268j$...
    >I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    >have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >
    > I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    > size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    > that be correct?
    >
    > Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the
    > advantages/disadvantages?
    > The only difference I can see in the specs is the memory clock runs 200MHz
    > faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070
    >
    > Leaning towards the ultimate as it's been around a bit longer and tends to
    > have better consumer reviews but this could just be because there are more
    > of them. :)
    >
    >
    >
    > -KENT
    >
     
    First of One, Feb 22, 2007
    #3
  4. Kent Smith

    Kent Smith Guest

    Clas Mehus wrote:
    > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:25:09 +1300, "Kent Smith"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice
    >> they also have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >>
    >> I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the
    >> memory size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better
    >> cooling. Would that be correct?

    >
    > If the memory speed is the same, the performance in most cases will be
    > the same. There might be some differences in very high resolutions,
    > but the board at the same time don't have the performance to use such
    > high resolutions.
    >
    >> Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the
    >> advantages/disadvantages? The only difference I can see in the specs
    >> is the memory clock runs 200MHz faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070

    >
    > No, not overclocked. Since the 256 MB version has faster memory, it
    > will in general be faster than the 512 MB version.
    >
    > 512 MB on a board in this segment is a marketing tricks in most
    > situations.
    >
    > I personally havn't tested the 1950Pro in 256 vs 512, but have done it
    > with the X1900XT, which is "about the same" -- in general not much of
    > a difference.


    Fantastic - thanks for good info and quick reply. I'll go with the
    ultimate.


    -KENT
     
    Kent Smith, Feb 23, 2007
    #4
  5. Kent Smith

    FKS Guest

    "Kent Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:erl58e$268j$...
    >I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    >have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >
    > I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    > size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    > that be correct?


    I have the same Zalman cooler on my X1900 GT and it is silent. Current games
    don't take advantage of 512MB and by the time games benefit from 512MB, the
    x1950pro will not be able to handle them. I'd definitely go for the
    ultimate.
     
    FKS, Feb 23, 2007
    #5
  6. Kent Smith

    Kent Smith Guest

    First of One wrote:
    > The 256 MB "Ultimate" will run faster in almost all games due to the
    > higher-clocked memory, so get that one.
    >
    > Be aware the screw heads on the back of the Ultimate's Zalman cooler
    > stick out more than usual. If the two PCIe x16 slots on your
    > motherboard are separated by just one slot, you won't be able fit two
    > of these cards in Crossfire.
    >

    Thanks, good to know. I've got two slots (Gigabyte GA-965P-DS4) but not
    looking at doing crossfire just yet. Might eventually up to a couple of
    Directx10's when they're a bit more competitively priced.


    -KENT
     
    Kent Smith, Feb 23, 2007
    #6
  7. Kent Smith

    JamesH Guest

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102067

    and for $20 more you get eggroll.
    Clocks above are higher. The Pro is a scaled down version of the XT. I'd go
    for the gusto myself, I have an XTX and love it.

    "Kent Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:erl58e$268j$...
    >I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    >have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >
    > I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    > size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    > that be correct?
    >
    > Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the
    > advantages/disadvantages?
    > The only difference I can see in the specs is the memory clock runs 200MHz
    > faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070
    >
    > Leaning towards the ultimate as it's been around a bit longer and tends to
    > have better consumer reviews but this could just be because there are more
    > of them. :)
    >
    >
    >
    > -KENT
    >
     
    JamesH, Feb 23, 2007
    #7
  8. Kent Smith

    TheFug Guest

    Kent Smith schreef:
    > I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice they also
    > have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >
    > I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the memory
    > size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better cooling. Would
    > that be correct?
    >
    > Has anyone seen these cards compared and know the advantages/disadvantages?
    > The only difference I can see in the specs is the memory clock runs 200MHz
    > faster on the ultimate - overclocked?
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102075
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102070
    >
    > Leaning towards the ultimate as it's been around a bit longer and tends to
    > have better consumer reviews but this could just be because there are more
    > of them. :)
    >
    >
    >
    > -KENT
    >
    >


    What i understand is, yes: with the toprange line of ATI, it makes sense
    to have 512M memory onboard, but wit with the budget or mid range, it
    slows down performance, compared to 256M versions..
    Question: if so, why bother even bringing such models on market ?
     
    TheFug, Feb 25, 2007
    #8
  9. Kent Smith

    Kent Smith Guest

    TheFug wrote:
    > Kent Smith schreef:
    >> I was going to get a Sapphire 256MB x1950pro ultimate but notice
    >> they also have a 512MB for about the same price.
    >>
    >> I would imagine the 512MB would have better performance due to the
    >> memory size but the ultimate would be more reliable due to better
    >> cooling. Would that be correct?
    >>

    > What i understand is, yes: with the toprange line of ATI, it makes
    > sense to have 512M memory onboard, but wit with the budget or mid
    > range, it slows down performance, compared to 256M versions..
    > Question: if so, why bother even bringing such models on market ?


    I agree with a previous post, the answer unfortunately, is probably
    marketing. I almost bought the 512MB based purely on memory size. If they
    can make a bunch of people buy these things over a competitors 256MB cards,
    it has a purpose on the market. :)


    -KENT
     
    Kent Smith, Feb 25, 2007
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Nerd bloke

    Sapphire 9600 Pro Ultimate Edition

    Nerd bloke, Aug 2, 2003, in forum: ATI
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    222
    Figurt
    Aug 2, 2003
  2. Joe
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    240
  3. Cuzman
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    199
  4. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    262
    Clas Mehus
    Oct 29, 2006
  5. Too_Much_Coffee ®

    Newegg has Diamond X1950 Pro 512MB AGP

    Too_Much_Coffee ®, Dec 30, 2006, in forum: ATI
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,315
    Hawkeye
    Jan 3, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page