Good GPU for $100-200???

[kuronosan]

Looking to get a new card so that my video can get upgraded. I'm currently using an 8600GTS/256. What's good out there that will keep my gaming good at 720/1080 for the next couple of years? I'm poor, so if there's anything that'll let me play COD and BFBC at a decent FPS I'd be happy.

[wipers]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814143173

[Tirrock]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rd,2544-3.html

Tom's hardware updated their best video card by price list recently.

[wipers]

I'm sure the one's on Tom's list are fine by I'm a bit biased towards Nvidia. I currently have an ATI card and I don't like it very much.

[kuronosan]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rd,2544-3.html

Tom's hardware updated their best video card by price list recently.

I was looking at the 1GB 4850 model. Is it good?

[Tirrock]

I've been waiting to buy a new card, so I can't say if the 4850 is good on personal experience or not. I want to see what nvidia puts out next. I've been eyeing the 5770 myself, but that's $60-70 more than the 4850.

pcper.com recommends ATi cards on their builds too, but since that website started off as an AMD site (from what I remember) I kind of wonder about it.

[kuronosan]

I've done nothing but buy nvidia chipsets because I didn't like ATI cards after the old radeon series... and nvidia was supposed to be much better.

Now I'm hearing that ATI is just as good if not better.

[Celeras]

I said it in a couple of threads already, but nVidias newest generation of cards is expected out in the beginning of March. After this, the prices of everything else will go down. Unless you're in some dire hurry, I'd recommend waiting for this so you can get a better card for your money.

[kuronosan]

What about this one?

http://www.amd.com/us/products/deskt...-overview.aspx

[Isiolia]

Re: HD4850 - it's a solid card, but it's been out for a while. Personally, I have a 512MB one, and have had it since fall '08. For the $100 price, and for what's out now, it's a solid performer at a good price.

That being said, as you're looking at the 1GB, the 5750 is probably the better way to go. It's only slightly more expensive, tends to perform comparably, if not better, than the 4850, but has more bells n' whistles + lower power/heat.

It's not so much the case with the 5770, which performs worse than its predecessor, the 4870.

If you're going much above the 5750 range, I would definitely second the recommendation to wait a few weeks. Right now, GTX 260s are in short supply (with inflated prices) and/or out of stock in many places. While I am expecting nVidia's initial offerings with their new chip to be on higher-end cards, pushing some of their older models down into the sub-$200 wouldn't be that hard to fathom.

With ATI's newer $150-200 range card, the 5770, actually being a step back...waiting to see if nVidia puts up a better fight (or pushes 5850 prices down) would be prudent. Sub-$150...eh...I don't see that changing much.

[kuronosan]

Should I buy a GTX260 1gb if I find it?

[Isiolia]

Should I buy a GTX260 1gb if I find it?

IMO, not really. Not right now. It's generally competitive with an HD4870, which is a $170ish card, albeit also with dwindling supply & thus a slightly jacked price. With a quick look, the price on a lot of available GTX260s has climbed well past $200, though there still may be better deals around. Keep in mind, it was a ~$160 card in December.

It just plain doesn't make sense, to me, to pay a $40-50 premium for the same performance. Especially not when the reason for that price gap is basically because everyone is anticipating new products next month. Granted, probably not actual new sub-$200 products, but still, nVidia has simply renamed some of their cards for a model refresh already. -Something- as good or better should pop up on the nVidia side at the GTX260's rightful price point.

[nitsuj]

I have 2x 8800GT in Sli mode, and even though it's a 3 year old card I see little reason to upgrade right now.

That chipset is just amazing.

[Olo401]

That being said, as you're looking at the 1GB, the 5750 is probably the better way to go. It's only slightly more expensive, tends to perform comparably, if not better, than the 4850, but has more bells n' whistles + lower power/heat.

It's not so much the case with the 5770, which performs worse than its predecessor, the 4870.

You're right in one aspect, but not completely. The direct predecessor to the 5770 is the 4770, not the 4870, so you would need to compare those two GPUs directly to see the performance boost from 4-series to 5-series. Likewise, you would compare the 5870 to the 4870.

That said, on overall graphics performance the 5770 sits somewhere between the 4850 and 4870 (due not only to the new GPU core but also because the 5770 uses GDDR5 instead of GDDR3 in the 4850). I'm pretty sure this was done deliberately to give mid-range users a lower cost alternative to the 58xx while still providing a significant performance boost over the previous line and allow AMD/ATI to chop away at NVidia's market share with a card that is close in performance to the GTX260.

To the OP : Something is up right now with the NVidia cards (a lot of them are out of stock on Newegg) which makes me think that the GF100/GTX 4xx may be coming REAL soon. I would recommend holding off for a couple weeks for an announcement. If you ABSOLUTELY must have a card yesterday tho I would get a Radeon 5770, preferably XFX brand for the great warranty.

[Isiolia]

You're right in one aspect, but not completely. The direct predecessor to the 5770 is the 4770, not the 4870, so you would need to compare those two GPUs directly to see the performance boost from 4-series to 5-series. Likewise, you would compare the 5870 to the 4870.

Well, in a sense, the 4770 would be the predecessor to the entire 5000 series as it was ATI's first 40nm part... However, I don't think that the 4770 and the 5770 were targeted at the same market segment, given that the 4770 was intended to launch as a $110ish card - at the time occupied by the 4830, which it outperformed.

The 4870 was never as expensive a card as the 5870 either, as it debuted as a $299 part, where that's a $399 card atm. The launch-time equivalent would be the 5850, in terms of market position, with no equivalent $199 part to the 4850.

However, at launch, the 5750 and 5770 were priced similarly to what the 4850 and 4870 cost. That's more what I'm referring to. ATI's "new" card at the $160ish price point has lower performance than the older model available at that same price.

I understand what you mean, but I just tend to think of things more in terms of market segment rather than the model number.

[Olo401]

I don't disagree with that viewpoint; actually I think those pricepoints are deliberate on AMD/ATI's part.. price the cards on equal footing to last gen's flagship low enough that they'll fly, and keep the new flagship really high for the power users (until NVidia responds with their new models). Pretty genius marketing imo.

[Komm Suesser Tod]

I'm looking for a new card, for gaming also, around $100 or so if I can swing it.

So, the general consensus is to wait for nVidia to put out the new chipset in the beginning of March?

[Ramor]

that appears to be the consensus, though i'm unsure when exactly in march all of this is supposed to go down

[Isiolia]

I have my doubts that the ~$100 price point will be changed much, but waiting shouldn't hurt.

[Elites]

Personally getting this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-141-_-Product for future proof on DX11 and badcompany 2. I wouldn't wait for nvidia's new releases, you won't know how much your paying and what your paying for as it's all up in the air and most of all, it's going to bring down the prices of Ati's DX11 cards which are more than sufficient to run anything for awhile.