Craigrox said:
So we aren't talking about a 1 GB card compared to a completely different 2 GB card? I.e manufactured To be that size from the start.
Well I'm not entirely sure what you are asking about to be honest. Your questions sound like you really don't know much of anything about hardware, which is seemingly inconsistent with the fact that you have guides in your sig.
If it's a serious question, well the amount of memory a graphics card has really tells you little or nothing about the performance of the card. You do need a certain amount of memory to run at high resolutions, but the amount on the cards is generally dictated by some multiple of the width of the memory bus. Which is why you see all sorts of odd numbers on graphics cards that you don't typically see else where.
The width of the memory bus and the speed of the ram are basically far, far more important than the amount of memory, because 3D graphics require shuffling enormous amounts of data around very quickly and that is where the bottle necks are likely to occur. At least the ones related to memory.
More memory on cards is basically an attempt to cash in on the fact that people don't necessarily know the difference between a GF108 and a GK104 chip or the advantages of a 256 bit memory bus with GDDR5 vs 192 bit with GDDR3, but they DO understand that 2 is bigger than 1. So it must be better right?
A guy I know got a 2gb nVidia 9600 because of this, which was a mid range chip 4 generations ago. I've recently purchased a 670 which despite being vastly more powerful requires just 2gb to run games spanning three 1080p monitors at a vastly higher frame rate.