answer my question pls...

hey guys!!
does a 512mb 7600gs performs much better than a 256mb one?

yup

Not necessarily. mr2ksports, post your system specs because going with the 512mb one might not be worth it, especially since the 7600 is a midrange card(probably low-end now).

specs
P4 3.20E Ghz w/ HT (socket 478)
512 MB RAM Dual Channel set-up (planning to add 1GB more)
512 MB Geforce 7600 gs AGP

i bought this gpu cause this is the best gpu that my money can buy. hope it performs better than a 256 one

yes. it would perform better. just take my word for it

you should add more RAM though

especially if your running vista, one gig or more is a must to run it at full potential

can you explain why it will perform better? explain briefly

with vista?

its just a recommendation thats all, i mean you can run it on lower then a gig, but you will find after a while it gets really sluggy and slow, but upgrading to a gig or more will help it to run at full speed

can you explain why it will perform better? explain briefly

Vista is extremely resource hungry, so the more RAM the better.

not about vista thing.. i was asking what are the advantages of having more video memory (eg 512 vs 256mb) in games... cause i have read from the other forums that having 512 for 7600gs is useless.. and what does this memory for?(in gaming)

and lastly.. this is out of topic
if i have sata HDD instead IDE/PATA will i experience improvement on gaming?

Sata HDD's are generally faster, so you should see improvement, even if it's barely noticeable. When I bought my new computer I got a 500 mb SATA HDD with a 32mb cache and that perpendicular technology or whatever it's called. The difference from my 250 gb ATA 133 drive is very noticeable. Although, I am comparing an almost completely empty hard drive to a very full and probably fragmented hard drive on two different computers.

From my past experience, more video ram won't really run a game faster because cards that have more ram usually have a lower clock speed on that ram. The 512 mb on the 7600 might not be worth since it isn't a high-end card, but it could allow you to run a game in a higher resolution then you could normally run with the 256 version without having the framerate drop as much as it would if you had 256 mb.

From my past experience, more video ram won't really run a game faster because cards that have more ram usually have a lower clock speed on that ram. The 512 mb on the 7600 might not be worth since it isn't a high-end card, but it could allow you to run a game in a higher resolution then you could normally run with the 256 version without having the framerate drop as much as it would if you had 256 mb.

I would add that it won't really make anything faster or better looking, since it's not a high-end card as Pdub mentioned, but it may certainly reduce any stuttering and mouse lag you might experience otherwise, since it will buffer more info with 512MB compared to 256.

thanks for that

and i just wanna ask why the pc games can't lock frames rates like the console does? and what about v-sync? is it different from locking the frame rate?

Some games offer that possibility if you go tweak their .ini files and such, but trust me, you wouldn't want that on PC. On most recent games, even with the latest hardware, it's not like you would be able to stay at 40 or 50 fps for example. Of course it sucks when your performance sinks in the 10s or under, but if you understand what your PC is capable of and how you should set your in-game settings, you should be able to avoid that anyway and you'll be glad that your fps does fluctuate.
Except if you really have a great performance overall, you probably shouldn't use vsync (especially with this type of card). It will not only cap your fps, but it will just reduce it drastically, even if you use the Triple Buffer to offset its effects.
You might want to take a look at this guide if you have concerns about performance in general: http://www.tweakguides.com/Graphics_1.html
It explains all basic concepts very thoroughly.

thank you for the response..
how about putting a 8400 on windows xp?? is it better than 7900?