Shared Memory Efficiency

[The_JoKeR_]

Hello everyone, I know about PCs but I'm not at all an expert or anything and I've got a question on shared video memory. I use my PC mainly for gaming and I'm wondering what the "efficiency" of shared memory is. I mean, is the shared memory coming from the system RAM as fast as the dedicated graphics memory? If not what is the difference in terms of speed / performance? My system specs are below if needed for reference. Thanks in advance.

 

[The_JoKeR_]

I don't know why my signature wasn't displayed but here's my system specs:


i7 930 @ 2.80GHz | Intel X58SO DDR3 Motherboard | 4x2GB OCZ Gold DDR3 RAM @ 1600 MHz | Seagate 2x500 GB (RAID) @ 7200 rpm | MSI GTX 460 HAWK 1GB DDR5 (4096 MB max.) | Win7 Ultimate 64-bit

 

[Nashsafc]

I thought that it's the architecture, how many stream processors the graphics card has rather than the memory. Memory of the graphics card is just for allowing enough storage on the graphics card, it's for high resolutions i think, the higher your video memory doesn't equate to extra performance. If you play on a 1280 x 1024 resolution, the difference between 512mb and 1gb for the same graphics card is not anything noticeable, a higher amount of memory is useful for higher resolutions such as that of 1680 x 1050 and when you enable vertical sync and triple buffering as it uses more video memory. I suppose it's like normal system memory as in you only need just enough memory for optimal performance, but you can increase the frequency of the memory to make it run faster, adding more memory won't change anything.

 

[The_JoKeR_]

I thought that it's the architecture, how many stream processors the graphics card has rather than the memory. Memory of the graphics card is just for allowing enough storage on the graphics card, it's for high resolutions i think, the higher your video memory doesn't equate to extra performance. If you play on a 1280 x 1024 resolution, the difference between 512mb and 1gb for the same graphics card is not anything noticeable, a higher amount of memory is useful for higher resolutions such as that of 1680 x 1050 and when you enable vertical sync and triple buffering as it uses more video memory. I suppose it's like normal system memory as in you only need just enough memory for optimal performance, but you can increase the frequency of the memory to make it run faster, adding more memory won't change anything.

I usually use my native resolution of 1920x1200 for games. If there is no difference in performance between the actual dedicated video memory and the system RAM shared for use as video memory, then there is no point in spending money on graphics cards with high memory (2-3 GB), just need to make sure you have enough total video memory (including shared). This is why I asked the question in the first place.

 

[xtcx]

Shared Memory is a good concept esp for cases like low local memory. Shared memory is as fast as the mobo Bus speed, such as FSB of 1333 MHz will be the max memory cycles too, where as dedicated memory drives clocks at 4000MHz or so. Shared memory is fast, but dedicated memory is the fastest.

Also the more resolution you choose to play, the more memory it takes. As well as when you want to increase the texture quality to high more maximum, again it consumes more memory. At this current gen gaming, 1GB is sufficient and hope to last for atleast 2~3 years since HD gaming will be the standard for expected some 5 or more years, unless developers come with very high resolution textures

 

[xtcx]

Who knows, even after few years, vendors may provide slot for GPU memory upgrade too

 

[The_JoKeR_]

Best answer selected by The_JoKeR_.

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey