Originally Posted by jabba2
And hes using a ATI Radeon X800 XT 256-MB video card to do testing. That card doesnt even need system memory compared to video with 128MB or 64MB like most notebooks have.
Even with that awesome video card there was still a 5 frame difference between the PC2700 and PC3200.
Its actually very impressive the PC3200 had that effect with an ATI Radeon X800 XT 256-MB.
Try it with a 64MB MR9600 the framerate difference would be larger than 5fps. For lower end notebooks its pretty significant.
You just showed your lack of knowledge about hardware with those statements. Heck, I guess I'll just take all the RAM out of my desktop if it isn't needed then
The tests I personally ran, which yielder much closer than 5-6% difference in those tests were done on a higher end desktop with a PCI-E 6800GT, and a system using an AGP TI4600. The peroformance difference between DDR400 and DDR333 was even less (as it should have been) on the machine with the GF4 Ti4600.
Here is the explanation as to why that statement was ludicrous. As the GPU quality decreases, the CPU becomes the bottleneck, not the RAM. With any current game, the RAM (up to at least a gig, 2gigs in many cases with newer games) is under 100% load thanks to the extremely complex textures used in todays applications, regardless of GPU. A less powerful GPU doesn't put any more stress on the RAM. It puts a ton more stress on the CPU though. With the exception of cards such as the new hypermemory cards, system RAM has zilch to do with the GPU. Certain things are slated to VRAM and certain things are slated to system RAM. The system RAM doesn't take over what the VRAM can't handle.