Guys, I need some good advice.
My nvidia 8800GT has just blown up, or at least started showing me random colour fuzz everywhere and return 800x600 res max. Loved that card, it died too young. But now I have to figure out what to buy next and there is so many options that are really not clearly defined I'm getting lost, so any advice very gratefully received.
Bit of background. Running windows 7 64bit, on a Q6600 @2.4Ghz. 2Gb Ram. with a quality 500 Watt PSU. Getting 7.1 on the windows experience for processer, 5.5 for ram and 5.8 for Hard disk.
Money is'nt the problem as such as I have a good job, but I really want to get good value for money. I am definately a gamer, but not a really hard core one. I'm after value for money. If I can buy 90% of whatever the current max performance is for 50% of the price of current max performance I'm a happy camper. I will be loading up Dragon Age as soon as I get the system sorted, and L4D2 as soon as thats out. They don't need to look the very best they can, but near best would be nice.
What I can't figure out is if I should get ones of these new DX11 cards, or maybe a cheaper but good DX10 card and use the left over cash to get 8gb of ram and a small solid state hard disk for the OS?
Where should my pirorities be?
If you dont mind going ati: just get the 5000 series card that falls within your price range, you are paying about 15 percent more for a DX11 card at most.
I would get 4 gb of ram but the benifit of 8 is probably not worth it yet, and i would think you computer will need to be mostly replaced before 8 gigs becomes worth it.
Its up to you if you want 20 to 60 percent better fps or the prefomance improvement of a soidstate. Though getting 1 or 2 gigs will make your card last longer before is memory is too low for games (be two to 3 years before this will occur, unless you want to play really demanding games at max).
Graphics cards being what they are, how fast the industry moves forward, and prices, I always buy long term. I don't mind paying $400 or $500 for a good graphics card so long as I know I'll be using it and I won't need a newer one to run anything that comes out in the next 4 or 5 years. As a general rule the less you pay for an older card the less amount of time it will be before you need to upgrade to run the new games coming out, whether we're talking two or three years from now, or 4 or 5 or 6.
If I were you I'd definitely go with a card that's capable of DX10 or DX11 since that's what most games will be moving to. In a year or two (probably less) they'll most likely stop making games that support DX9c.
OK thanks. I had been thinking I should get more bang for my buck by getting a good DX10 card. But it seems I should just pay as much as I'm comfortable with for a DX11 card. I should get 4gb ram, but a solid state hard disk is a marginal consideration.
Fair summary?
You should give us a budget
Also a note on Dragon Age, my quad (Q8200 oced to 2.8) is 60% used while in Dragon Age. Mixed with a 4870 there are little to no FPS drops, but my friend with a higher clocked dual core has some issues with the game
ATI 5000 series should be the only thing on your shopping list for video cards.
You can get a 5770 for $150 and it's DX 11 ready. Even cheaper is the 5750.
And both have similar performance to the higher end 4800 cards but with a lot less power consumption and Dx 11 support. Seems like a no brainer to me.
If you can afford the 5870 and can find it then go for it and you'll have the top of the line card available that blows anything Nvidia has.
Thanks Guys,
One Sapphire HD 5770 1GB on its way with Crucial 4GB (2X2GB) DDR2 800MHz/PC2-6400 Ballistix Memory.
And a copy of Dragon Age.
Which from the 35 other threads I'm guessing is as good as Mass Effects or Fallout 3.
Fallout 3 wasn't that great to be honest
And Mass Effect is another bioware game
"Fallout 3 wasn't that great to be honest"
Respectfully Sir, it was epic.
NVIDIA really hasn't been on the ball lately, which is probably why they've been investing heavily in bribing AAA game developers to optimize their games for NVIDIA cards instead. Your old 8800 was a fantastic value for money, but they haven't come close to that value for money since. Can't really add anything more here, the 5770 is indeed the best value for money right now. The 5850 is great for an extra $100 or so, but $100 isn't exactly pocket change for some people.
I'm not so sure about this. Buying a mid-high level card is usually a good idea, but absolute top of the line is a mistake. That Geforce 8800 Ultra cost $500+ two years ago, but is now worse than a $150 GTX 260. Generally better to buy two steps back and pay half as much, and then buy a new one two years later. Not only are you ending up with a better card for the same money, you renew your warranty and might even be able to sell the old one. At the very worst you can throw the old one in another machine and use it as a backup system.
gtx260 core 216 version
good bang for the buck
i replaced my 8800gt with it last december
Unfortunately, the GTX260 costs more than the 4870 yet is equal in performance. NVIDIA really needs to pull their heads out of their asses and cut prices soon. ATI isn't a joke anymore.
That depends really. Lets take the GTX 260. There are multiple versions of that card on the market right now. One of them is $150, there's another GTX 260 that's still $300. The difference is normally more memory on the card, more pipe lines, faster calculations, faster floating point operations...
When most people buy graphics cards today the only thing they are concerned with is the cost of the card. They don't usually look deeper into the cards specs. As in most things in life, Quality cost more....period. Sometimes there are deals that go against convention but more often then not things that you pay more for tend to last longer and work better. I go with NVidia cards because of the experiences I've had in the last 12 years building my own computers.
I don't want to get into the NVidia versus ATI Fanboy wars. I really don't care to argue symantics or company policy or who's making the best whatever for the best prices. These companies have been the top two competitors since the fall of Voodoo. ATI does make good cards, usually for a cheaper price, but that price always comes at a "cost". Whether it's not as many pipelines, not as much memory on the card, cheaper materials, almost always something. I have bought and used ATI cards before as well. I've owned two ATI cards out of the eight or so cards I've bought in my lifetime. Every ATI card I've ever used has burnt out on me at some point or another, more often then not within the first two years of owning them. Every NVidia card I've ever bought comes with a Lifetime warranty. If it burns out or blows up at Any time because of standard use I can send it back and they'll send me a replacement. It's the same with my motherboard as well. I've only had one NVidia card ever burn up on me. That's one out of six. The other five I still have and they end up going from my system to my wifes, then from hers to my mothers as I upgrade again.
It's the same with Pentium and AMD. I've only had two AMD processors in my life and both of them burned out on me after about 3 years. That's with me replacing the cooling gel every year. I've only had one Pentium ever burn out on me and it took almost 12 years to finally go. What's the difference between AMD and Pentium? Anywhere between $150 to $300.
There are other people out there though who have the Reverse scenario happen to them where every NVidia and Pentium they've owned has been crap, I don't doubt it. If you count them up, then count up the people with experiences like mine, I think you'll find far more in the camp I'm in then on the opposite side of the fence.
You're correct in that everyone has different experiences. I've used ATI ever since the 9800 because I had 3 Nvidia cards before that crap out on me and I said never again. Since then Nvidia has usually ruled the high end roost but ATI has had very fine mid range products. Now with the 5000 series ATI really is king in both performance and price for the first time in a while. And Nvidia has nothing in the pipeline to compete with it which is very bad on their part. They think "maybe next year" they will have something. They are going to let ATI really eat into their market share now because they got caught with their pants down.
But again, most people will be very happy with their Nvidia or ATI card. Most of the time it all comes down to just a few FPS anyway and for the average gamer it just won't matter.
I replace my video card typically every 2 years. I'm still running my OC'd ATI 3870 and would be looking to get a 5870 here in a few months because I was worried about performance in Dragon Age. But that old 3870 gets me 50-60 fps in Dragon Age so I won't need to upgrade after all. It's not like when Oblivion forced me to build a whole new system.
if you buy nvidia, you buy only from one manufacturer , EVGA , lifetime warrenty FTW!
Raven
You know that you're letting your feelings control you too much when you only buy Nvidia cards simply because of your personal experiences.
You should look at some big study where everything is taken into account, like manufacturer (LeadTek, MSI, Sapphire etc.), kisel quality, developer problems (perhaps ATI rushed the R&D at one or two generations of cards) and such.
People I've known in the past are guilty of the same things you're doing. One guy rathered bought an expensive Pentium III without even looking at AMDs alternatives simply because his previous computer (AMD K.6-2) was crap because of the BAD AMD K.6-2 processor (My first computer was an AMD K.6-2 and I can verify that they were utter crap.) For my next computer, I still bought an AMD Athlon 1200 since they were really good. And 3 years after that it was time for a AMD Barton 2500+.
Now I've had favorable experiences with two generations of AMD eventhough my first experience was so bad I cried at night, cursing my AMD and wishing for an Intel like my friends had. Still, in 2007 I gotted a Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0 GHz since it was the best processor for my money.
I've recently had bad experiences with Western Digital Raptor harddrives and I thought about sticking to other brands instead. If I see a study which would say that WDs harddrives are the most stable then I would discard my beliefs as bad luck and continue using WD.
So in conclusion, revising your opinion because of fact is what an intelligent person would do. Being stubborn and going with your feelings is what religious people do ( to me for my great punchlineargument )
As for the upgrade recommendation, get atleast a Radeon 59xx if buying from a store or get the best card for your money if you search through Ebay.
Oh crap didn't realize that the thread was so old
Its a good thread anyways. I will buy a new rig in a few months so I have started to read more about these things. I will probably go Dell eventhough people will tell me that I can get more value for money elsewhere. I have been burned by HP/Compaq before and I have had three quality Dell machines. I have never had anything break down on a Dell pc. I know that personal experiences can be deceiving (noone is perfect, I could get a Dell that breaks down).
You are mostly correct my friend. I do that from time to time and your argument stands....on everything I feel except for the Pentium argument. In my eyes Pentium means quality. I've never had a bad Pentium proc, not to mention my first PC taking 11-12 years to finally die. That computer had a Epic life span. Keep in mind it went through summers of no air conditioning in almost 100 degree heat. It ran in a little tiny room often so cloudy with smoke you could barely see the monitor in front of you when I had company over. It went through hell and kept going fine for all those years.
Unless they pull some huge Epic Fail, Pentium's quality will always shine through in my eyes.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
