Gaming World Forums
General Category => Technology and Programming => Topic started by: Jester on January 06, 2010, 03:01:07 pm
-
So my GF 8800 GTX is going kaput, it started just crashing L4D2 randomly but I just got a bluescreen on startup and my desktop is all kinda funky so I need to get a new one.
Thing is I'm building a whole new PC from scratch in the next year, so I don't want to spend a ton on this at the moment. I also can't afford it anyway.
So I need an okay mid-range card. Should I just get another 8800? They seem to be more expensive than I'd expect, but that might be cos they don't make them anymore or whatever.
I'm looking at a GF GT220 1GB right now, is that any good? I don't really know shit about cards released after the 8000 series.
Wow, my desktop is distorting as we speak. Quick, GW!!
edit: also, what's this PCI 2.0 thing? i dont think my mobo supports that. argh.
-
i have a geforce 2 MX 64MB i'll give you
-
i hate you and hope you die
i already reserved one im gonna go pick up tomorrow. some cheap gf 220 or something. kinda meh but itll do for a year
thanks for nothing gw!!
-
Q: asre you the real mario
-
the GT220 isnt a middle range graphics card, its a budget card. you should get a GTX260 core 216 for the best midrange card. you can pick one up for about £150, its pretty much almost as good as a GTX280/285 and will be perfectly fine for everything, but far more affordable.
the 300 series is coming out later this year though so you may want to wait
-
did you miss the part where i said im building a new pc next year, i dont want to spend a ton, and my current pc is melting?
like.. the whole topic
-
My PC was blue-screening a few months ago when playing large videos. Turned out it was a graphics driver bug. An update fixed it.
But if you only buying a card for one year then I'd recommend a Geforce 9800GT. I have one and I'm happy with it. It's powerful enough to have all the settings (except anti-aliasing) on full in most of the games I'm playing. Ebuyer has some starting at only £68.
-
did you miss the part where i said im building a new pc next year, i dont want to spend a ton, and my current pc is melting?
like.. the whole topic
pro tip if you get a good graphics card now you can use it in your new pc later :)
-
pro tip a years a long time for technology
-
pro tip if you are happy with an 8 series in 2010 you will be happy with a 200 series in 2013
-
pro tip if you are happy with an 8 series in 2010 you will be happy with a 200 series in 2013
im not, tho. when i make my new pc it will be all new. this machine was a beast when i made it in like 06 and i want a new beast when i make a new one :D
but yeah i dont have like £300 to blow on a graphics card like i did when i bought this one. this is literally just so i can play games, even on low, for the next year until i move.
i will look at 9800s tho. i run games on full without AA on this card so that sounds pretty ideal.
-
When you consider a new computer down the road, consider getting one with Lucid Hydra's chip... it's like SLI except better... you can mix and match any video card and it should distribute the game rendering evenly. You'll be able to keep your GT 220 or whatever and mix it with something from the G300 series. Theoretically (and in some cases demonstratively, from what we've seen from the pre-production units) it should perform better than SLI as well.
-
lock this topic. or talk about geforce 2. the best geforces.
-
i'm going to have to disagree with you there atari. the 3dfx voodoo is a far superior graphics card.
-
I still have a voodoo 3 on my table, I don't know what to do with it
-
you're wrong chef. this doesn't end here.
-
go with a radeon 5770 pro. it's not a beefstick, but it's great for the price and you can expect some better performance down the road than the 4870 when DX11 drivers get better.
alternatively i have an 8800 GTS 320 that's in good shape you can have for a low price
-
im not, tho. when i make my new pc it will be all new. this machine was a beast when i made it in like 06 and i want a new beast when i make a new one :D
but yeah i dont have like £300 to blow on a graphics card like i did when i bought this one. this is literally just so i can play games, even on low, for the next year until i move.
i will look at 9800s tho. i run games on full without AA on this card so that sounds pretty ideal.
if you literally just want a temporary low power graphics card then just get another 8800 or even an 8600 or something if you can find one
-
Don't ever buy an ATI card. They are SO shite. The GUI and multiscreen support, support of HDMI etc is abysmal. NVidia have always been quality.
-
I wouldn't say ATI is shit. Period. NVidia cards seem to have more features for your buck - PhysX, 3Dvision support, can actually force games to run specific settings like anti-aliasing. ATI typically gives you the best value, though. And I will say that the higher end 5000 series has me wet down there.
-
i've actually had a few nvidia cards die on my (TI 4200, a GeForce 5200FX) whereas the ATI cards i've used have never had any problems at all. I'm using an 8600GT though in my laptop right now though, and its been fine for the last 2 years.
-
eds confusing hardware with software. catalyst sucks but you don't have to run it, i'm pretty sure nvidia has an equivalent that you also won't need to use unless you're still on windows 98SE (best os for gaming)
-
Catalyst! That's what it was called. Terrible. So many hours wasted fiddling with that bollocks. They need to keep it simple, keep it clean.
-
i've actually had a few nvidia cards die on my (TI 4200, a GeForce 5200FX) whereas the ATI cards i've used have never had any problems at all. I'm using an 8600GT though in my laptop right now though, and its been fine for the last 2 years.
My geforces never died (geforce 2 and 4 mx and fx 5500 ) but my cousin's 8600 GT died
I think they die so quickly because they use too many megawatts
-
I knew a guy who would upgrade to the latest graphics card every year. He told me he has had several ATI cards die on him, but never an NVidia.
-
i have an ati rage 128 pro that still works
anyway nvidia are the best choice right now and have been for years, theres no reason to buy ati
-
i don't know how you figure that at all, they've got both the most powerful and the best budget cards out and since they were taken over by AMD you can expect greater compatibility with other AMD hardware
Catalyst! That's what it was called. Terrible. So many hours wasted fiddling with that bollocks. They need to keep it simple, keep it clean.
i hated it because it used a bunch of ram but i'm pretty sure nvidia has an equivalent (that's easier to use). still unless you're constantly fiddling with gamma levels and clock speeds you shouldn't really need to use it more than once a format, if that.
I knew a guy who would upgrade to the latest graphics card every year. He told me he has had several ATI cards die on him, but never an NVidia.
a couple of things. ATI makes chips and a dozen or so other companies make them into cards, hence GIGABYTE RADEON, TACHYON RADEON, etc etc etc. so it's pretty hard to make quality complaints. if the card is working and over time stops working that's wear and tear, caused generally by your power problems or temperature problems (i.e. stuff you do to it). also if the card died within a year it'd be covered by warranty, either through the manufacturer or through consumer gaurantees.
seriously buy with your pocket, choosing between the two only makes a difference if you're buying the same dang card or if you want to use their specific technology (hybrid whatever etc). a green eye or a bright red square can't compete with a smaller manufacturing process
-
i don't know how you figure that at all, they've got both the most powerful and the best budget cards out and since they were taken over by AMD you can expect greater compatibility with other AMD hardware
budget cards are all trash so 'most powerful budget card' is pointless, but i'd be willing to bet that nvidia cards are basically just as powerful as ATI cards at the same price point
midrange the GTX260 beats the 4870 since they introduced the core 216 model and is about $20 cheaper on average
high range i dont know at all because youre an idiot if you buy that shit
compatibility with other AMD hardware is pointless because nobody buys amd over an intel right now unless youre an idiot with too much brand loyalty to amd (literally if you buy an amd over a core i7 youre bad person)
ATI chips have really bad hardware video acceleration, they only supprt like 1 bluray x264 profile (meaning no bluray rips will be hardware accelerated, it has to be exactly whats on a bluray disc) whereas nvidia chips support a wide variety of formats and resolutions
maybe next generation ATI will come out ahead (doubtful because fermi is going to own) but for now buy nvidia.
-
compatibility with other AMD hardware is pointless because nobody buys amd over an intel right now unless youre an idiot with too much brand loyalty to amd (literally if you buy an amd over a core i7 youre bad person)
Not everyone wants to buy a high-end chip. Below that AMD a very competative to Intel. Their high-end phenoms are on par with core 2 quads whilst costing less.
-
i gotta go with bretly on this one the only reason i'd be concerned with amd support is if you already have an amd processor in your computer, very few people are going out and buying them right now
i still have one but i built my computer a good five or six years ago now (still runs good since it was a really high end machine at the time, but now it's just average.....and has an nvidia card in it btw!)
-
budget cards are all trash so 'most powerful budget card' is pointless, but i'd be willing to bet that nvidia cards are basically just as powerful as ATI cards at the same price point
midrange the GTX260 beats the 4870 since they introduced the core 216 model and is about $20 cheaper on average
high range i dont know at all because youre an idiot if you buy that shit
compatibility with other AMD hardware is pointless because nobody buys amd over an intel right now unless youre an idiot with too much brand loyalty to amd (literally if you buy an amd over a core i7 youre bad person)
ATI chips have really bad hardware video acceleration, they only supprt like 1 bluray x264 profile (meaning no bluray rips will be hardware accelerated, it has to be exactly whats on a bluray disc) whereas nvidia chips support a wide variety of formats and resolutions
maybe next generation ATI will come out ahead (doubtful because fermi is going to own) but for now buy nvidia.
i don't know if you're just clowning about but this is pretty silly. idiots buy high range and budget cards, the HD5770 is a budget card that nearly as powerful as the core 216 that's cheaper and does direct x 11
compatibility with other AMD hardware is an advantage because amd make more than cpus; the dragon platform is synergistic. in terms of cpu alone the topic is talking about a replacement in a computer he already has, but here are some situations in which an AMD cpu may be a smart choice over a core i7:
-you're building a budget rig (the cheapest core i7 here is ~$200 more than the most expensive phenom II)
-you're building a gaming rig (the cpu is rarely the limiting factor in gaming, extra cash goes to graphics)
-you're building an HTPC (amd integrated graphics are insane in terms of HD stuff)
-you're likely to want to upgrade your cpu without changing your motherboard (intel has more sockets than transistors)
i don't even know what you're talking about that it only supports one h.264 profile unless you mean it supports only bluray profile 1, which doesn't mean what you said it does and is also wrong as avivo hd supports profile 1.1
AMD stuff is still an option, though if you have the cash and desire for BEST AVAILABLE you're going to want an intel chip with a nvidia card or two.
-
i don't know if you're just clowning about but this is pretty silly. idiots buy high range and budget cards, the HD5770 is a budget card that nearly as powerful as the core 216 that's cheaper and does direct x 11
you can also say the hd5770 is a cheaper card that is worse and doesnt support physx and cuda
-you're building a budget rig (the cheapest core i7 here is ~$200 more than the most expensive phenom II)
look at a core i5 or even a core 2 for this, but i will admit that amd cpus seem to be better for price:performance
-you're building a gaming rig (the cpu is rarely the limiting factor in gaming, extra cash goes to graphics)
its enough of a limiting factor that it still needs consideration. this isnt an outright AMD win at all
-you're building an HTPC (amd integrated graphics are insane in terms of HD stuff)
rather get an atom
-you're likely to want to upgrade your cpu without changing your motherboard (intel has more sockets than transistors)
cool argument bro
i don't even know what you're talking about that it only supports one h.264 profile unless you mean it supports only bluray profile 1, which doesn't mean what you said it does and is also wrong as avivo hd supports profile 1.1
here is what i meant
Unfortunately If you're just decoding H.264/VC-1 content from Blu-Ray then it shouldn't matter, because both ATI and Nvidia cards decode L4.1 just fine. But Nvidia cards support up to 16 ref frames allowing for decoding of just about all L5.1 x264 encodes, which ATI's cards can't do (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1326480#post1326480)
-
(https://legacy.gamingw.net/etc/www.cackaloo.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/smug2.jpeg)
-
Argh does this really need to turn into an AMD/Intel Nvidia/ATI thread? They both have their merits, seriously.
On the proc front:
-AMD is king in the budget arena.
-Intel has captured the high end market by a long shot.
GPUS:
-ATI currently has the most powerful GPU on the market and typically has better price:performance. Catalyst is sort of infamously not good. Has Eyefinity in 5000 series.
-Nvidia is falling behind but still has some solid hardware and exclusive features. PhysX, 3D vision, CUDA.
-
Why would anyone use catalyst anyway? My ati card is old as fuuuck but I always just get the drivers only and use ati tray tools to mess around with options
-
you can also say the hd5770 is a cheaper card that is worse and doesnt support physx and cuda
look at a core i5 or even a core 2 for this, but i will admit that amd cpus seem to be better for price:performance
its enough of a limiting factor that it still needs consideration. this isnt an outright AMD win at all
rather get an atom
cool argument bro
i could also say the hd5770 is a cheaper card with similar performance, and physx and cuda are part of the extra performance. it's definitely worse but its cheaper and really close behind, ie a couple frames.
"outright AMD win" what are you talking about, this isn't AMD OR INTEL WHO'S BETTER this is in response to (literally if you buy an amd over a core i7 youre bad person) and "don't ever buy an ATI card because catalyst sucks."which are both pretty dumb things to say
i'm a huge fan of RISC processors but i would rather get a digital projector
and the fact that you need to change motherboards everytime you change your cpu is kinda important, especially as intel mobos tend to be more expensive also.
i couldn't care less about which anime mascot's inside my case, i'm more interested in what's in my wallet, and unless you're buying the LATEST STUFF it's really not black and white, especially when you bring time into consideration (eg latest low vs older high end)
-
and the fact that you need to change motherboards everytime you change your cpu is kinda important, especially as intel mobos tend to be more expensive also.
sigh amd change sockets just as much as intel, this is a dumb thing to say
-
I think he's got you in check there Climbtree.
-
argh why is this topic still going
-
Have you tried looking into the warranty policy for your card? I've had two cards fail on me (both nvidia cards) and I've used the warranties on them. Both of the cards I sent in were manufactured by evga and they have lifetime warranties where they'll replace your card with an equivalent or better card. It's worth a try, especially since the GT 220 is complete shit compared to the card you currently have.
-
I think he's got you in check there Climbtree.
no, with each new range of cpu intel puts out a new socket. currently (excluding servers) they have socket LGA775, LGA1366 and LGA1156 and AMD have AM2, AM2+ and AM3. you can put an AM3 chip in an AM2 motherboard. intels cpus are incompatible with different sockets.
-
no, with each new range of cpu intel puts out a new socket. currently (excluding servers) they have socket LGA775, LGA1366 and LGA1156 and AMD have AM2, AM2+ and AM3. you can put an AM3 chip in an AM2 motherboard. intels cpus are incompatible with different sockets.
you sure can but you still wont be able to use DDR3
are you aware there are important architectural reasons to change sockets and without changing the socket the processors would not improve
and that seriously 3 desktop sockets vs 3 with one being backwards compatible? wow intel really dropped the ball there
-
what is wrong with you? if you got an AM2 motherboard from 2006 you could still put the latest amd CPU in it. if you got an LGA775 motherboard from 2006 you would have to change motherboards twice to use the latest cpu, and the motherboards and cpus are more expensive.
-
you dont have to upgrade your computer as soon as a new processor is released dude
-
Topic: Middle-range graphics card go
-
i have the 5770 and the only game it lags on even a little is GTA IV, and i am pretty sure that is a processor issue. bretly is wrong.
-
i have the 5770 and the only game it lags on even a little is GTA IV, and i am pretty sure that is a processor issue. bretly is wrong.
what are you even claiming here
-
fuck hte police
-
fuck hte police
-
i have the 5770 and the only game it lags on even a little is GTA IV, and i am pretty sure that is a processor issue. bretly is wrong.
Man, don't lie... unless you want us to assume that you play all older games. There are facts of the matter on this kind of stuff... it's not hard to look up 5770 benchmarks (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5770,2446-7.html) and see that you are dead wrong.
-
according to your link if he played in 1680x1050 he'd get a decent framerate with very high settings enabled. it doesn't matter though since he didn't compare it to anything else, it's pretty much YOU ACTUALLY CAN PLAY GAMES WITH ATI CARDS
-
yeah who the fuck games in a 2k+ horizontal resolution anyhow?
-
yeah who the fuck games in a 2k+ horizontal resolution anyhow?
Awesome dudes who only crossfire with the raddest shader gigabytes
-
Listen, there exist a few facts in this matter
-
gypsies!!!!!
-
argh
die topic die