Bought a GT240 to replace my 8600GT, stupid move?

[nenforcer]

I'm gonna go against the flow and say that inadvertently the salesman, in the midst of his stupidity, recommended a better card to you, for your needs.

Since you are not a heavy gamer, the GT240 is a better choice than the 9800GT under many aspects: it has the lowest heat and power consumption of almost all gaming suitable cards, it supports Purevideo feature set C, which gives you full gpu decoding of H264, VC1 and MPEG2, all of it while being faster than your 8600GT.

And a 9800GT is not that much faster. If you wanted a real upgrade for gaming needs, then you need to look at a GTX 260 or an HD5770.

That's my opinion.

I agree with this post, and for the price you paid at retail, which I assume includes sales tax, you got a good deal. Nobody has mentioned that this card also supports DirectX 10.1 which was some sort of marketing buzz when the HD 4800 series of cards came out.

For your price range and the inability to shop online, I think you did the best you could.

You should be able to stretch this card out for 2 years at the most, by which time most games will probably be DX11 anyways.

Could you tell us what resolution you game at? That we be the deciding factor IMO on whether you should have ponied up for the 8800/9800GT.

Also, the 9600GSO is no more than half as powerful as this card with its 48 SP's and half the GDDR3 memory. That card was never an option here in May 2010.

 

[blanketyblank]

Why is everyon dissing the 9600GSO which is the ultimate bargain if you get lucky?
A number of them are the exact same as an 8800GTS 512 except with a different BIOS.

Long story short GTS 240 if you could have bought online you could have gotten that card plus an OCZ modxstream PSU for $74 AR from newegg.

At Frys if you have one in your state you could have gotten one for $52AR.

 

[edplayer]

I don't think he mentioned resolution. A GT 240 seems to be about within 5% of a stock 9600GT. I have an eVGA 9600GT SSC as my main card. My res is 1920x1080 and BC2 didn't run well (at medium settings). Also, if you check slickdeals, GT 240 usually pop up in the $45~55 range (with Mail in rebates, GDDR5 versions).

Why is everyon dissing the 9600GSO which is the ultimate bargain if you get lucky?

it all depends on the price. A 9600GSO isn't a deal just because of its name...

 

[Noobtastic]

Why is everyon dissing the 9600GSO which is the ultimate bargain if you get lucky?
A number of them are the exact same as an 8800GTS 512 except with a different BIOS.

Long story short GTS 240 if you could have bought online you could have gotten that card plus an OCZ modxstream PSU for $74 AR from newegg.

At Frys if you have one in your state you could have gotten one for $52AR.

the best buy came with a mail-in-rebate (~$20) but I never do those. ill probably have to hunt for the receipt to find it.

i dont think ive ever done a rebate in my life.

I usually game at 1024 x 768. On L4D2 the settings i think it is more or less the same, maybe 1280 x 960.

I don't like really high resolution - 1440 x 900 - because it makes everything really small.

the native resolution for my monitor is 1440 x 900 but i hate it. way too small.

this was the card i bought:

http://www.frys.com/product/6219280

 

[nenforcer]

Did you get the 512MB or 1GB GDDR5 version? At that resolution you should be fine with that card even with the 512MB version of the GT 240.

 

[Noobtastic]

Did you get the 512MB or 1GB GDDR5 version? At that resolution you should be fine with that card even with the 512MB version of the GT 240.

512mb.

hope i can play bad company 2...:\

 

[toyota]

512mb.

hope i can play bad company 2...:\

at 1440x900 512mb will be no problem with that level of card. the card itself maybe a little too weak for AA so you wont exceed 512mb in BC 2 or any other game at playable 1440x900 settings anyway. stop playing games at 1024x768 and 1280x960 though because thats silly when you have a widescreen monitor.

 

[Noobtastic]

at 1440x900 512mb will be no problem with that level of card. the card itself maybe a little too weak for AA so you wont exceed 512mb in BC 2 or any other game at playable 1440x900 settings anyway. stop playing games at 1024x768 and 1280x960 though because thats silly when you have a widescreen monitor.

so i can play bad company 2 with max settings?

what about L4d2?

so i should play 1440x900 in all games?

 

[toyota]

so i can play bad company 2 with max settings?

what about L4d2?

so i should play 1440x900 in all games?

I dont know about max settings or not but it should be okay pretty close to max. your cpu plays a role here to you know. yes try and play all your games at 1440x900 since that is your native res. if a game is too demanding then just turn down a setting or two but try to keep your native res. if you must turn down the res then use another 16:10 ratio if available instead 1024x768 or 1280/960 which are 4:3 resolutions and defeat the point of even having a widescreen monitor.

 

[mfenn]

the best buy came with a mail-in-rebate (~$20) but I never do those. ill probably have to hunt for the receipt to find it.

i dont think ive ever done a rebate in my life.

I usually game at 1024 x 768. On L4D2 the settings i think it is more or less the same, maybe 1280 x 960.

I don't like really high resolution - 1440 x 900 - because it makes everything really small.

the native resolution for my monitor is 1440 x 900 but i hate it. way too small.

this was the card i bought:

http://www.frys.com/product/6219280

FYI, most games nowadays scale the UI with resolution, so you're not really gaining anything (except a muddy picture) by running at less than native while gaming.

 

[blanketyblank]

the best buy came with a mail-in-rebate (~$20) but I never do those. ill probably have to hunt for the receipt to find it.

i dont think ive ever done a rebate in my life.

I usually game at 1024 x 768. On L4D2 the settings i think it is more or less the same, maybe 1280 x 960.

I don't like really high resolution - 1440 x 900 - because it makes everything really small.

the native resolution for my monitor is 1440 x 900 but i hate it. way too small.

this was the card i bought:

http://www.frys.com/product/6219280

umm if you're using a LCD you really should never be gaming at those resolutions.
LCDs are notorious for poor scaling so everything will look blurry. You shold be using your monitor's native resolution or something with the same ratio. Something like 1229 x 768
or whatever you can get your video card to support that divides out to be 1.6. Your games will look a lot better.

 

[manimal]

No way dude, I know its an inconvinience but you can't let them get away with that.

I remember when I was in the aisle over and the sales clerk was trying to sell a lady a P4 Laptop @ 2.4ghz and he said it was faster than the Core 2 Duo 2.0 ghz laptop based on clock speeds.

If I were you I'd storm in there, ask for the same "expert" and then slap a bench in his face and ask "how is this faster?" If you make enough ruckus might even get a freebie out of it.

So tired of these "experts" screwing over customers.

Try not to make blanket statements about people. While I agree the general level of competence at a Best Buy fits their pay model-8 bucks a hour if the kids are lucky- there are some good people that work there. I worked in the geeksquad to pay my way through college years ago and while I didnt like lots of what they asked us to do they never asked us to falsify any information and never try to mislead people. People on tech sites like AT like to lambast B&M employees but I challenge you to walk a mile in their shoes. Try dealing with senior citizens 9 hours a day and get yelled at for things that are not your fault for the rest of your day. Then do it all for barely anything over minimum wage. Extrapolate this argument for the call center you call in india, and the next person you belittle because they are doing their job.

A friend of mine was layed off for over two years from chrysler and has been working at a best buy to feed his kids for 1/10th of what he used to make. Interject a little humility in your life before you judge....


OP If you want to exchange your product you will be able to for a long time. Since Best Buy can process mfg warranty claims for the graphics cards they carry they will exchange it if it ever dies. I had a 4850 that died after two years. They gave me store credit for it two years later. If the first person you talk to says no kill them with kindness. The managers will usually cave to take care of a nice customer.

 

[edplayer]

so i can play bad company 2 with max settings?

there is no way you will be able to do max settings with that card. I tried lower resolutions on my 9600GT. 1680x1050 and maybe one lower. Still didn't run good (and this was on medium, 1X AA, no HBAO)

I ended up selling the game.


if you want to play BC2 well at 1440x900 I suggest that you get a Radeon 5770

 

[Noobtastic]

there is no way you will be able to do max settings with that card. I tried lower resolutions on my 9600GT. 1680x1050 and maybe one lower. Still didn't run good (and this was on medium, 1X AA, no HBAO)

I ended up selling the game.


if you want to play BC2 well at 1440x900 I suggest that you get a Radeon 5770

Well I won't be buying a new video card for awhile, if ever.

What settings could I play BC2 at?

 

[JAG87]

My guess is a mostly medium with few high settings.

Make sure to use either a configurator or tweak the settings.ini file yourself, as there are a lot more settings than the ingame menu allows you to modify. You will want to turn off bloom as it affects performance quite a bit, HBAO is not even an option with your card.

If I were you I would run at native resolution, force dx9, start with all settings on high and work my way down until you reach comfortable frame rates. I would also trade other settings in favor of high textures.

 

[toyota]

My guess is a mostly medium with few high settings.

Make sure to use either a configurator or tweak the settings.ini file yourself, as there are a lot more settings than the ingame menu allows you to modify. You will want to turn off bloom as it affects performance quite a bit, HBAO is not even an option with your card.

If I were you I would run at native resolution, force dx9, start with all settings on high and work my way down until you reach comfortable frame rates. I would also trade other settings in favor of high textures.

at 1440x900 and with his cpu there would be no real point in forcing DX9 as it probably would not increase the framerate much if at all. and speaking of textures forcing DX9 can actually mess up the textures in some spots and introduce some flickering. he should try running it on high settings with no AA and HBAO turned off and see how that goes at 1440x900.

 

[lurk3r]

The 240 with gddr5 is only marginally slower than an 8800gt, has a few less shaders, not really worth a trip back to the hell that is bestbuy imo. You are looking at 4-10 times the performance of what you had, and if you cannot order online this was not all that bad of a rip-off. Yes you could have done much better, but having something in hand costs a bit.

This site does not tell the whole tale, but is a good place to start when cross shopping video cards, there is a similar ATI chart.

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/132

 

[toyota]

The 240 with gddr5 is only marginally slower than an 8800gt, has a few less shaders, not really worth a trip back to the hell that is bestbuy imo. You are looking at 4-10 times the performance of what you had, and if you cannot order online this was not all that bad of a rip-off. Yes you could have done much better, but having something in hand costs a bit.

This site does not tell the whole tale, but is a good place to start when cross shopping video cards, there is a similar ATI chart.

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/132

4-10 times faster than an 8600gt? um not even close. the gt240 is about like a 9600gt which on average is about twice as fast as an 8600gt.

 

[edplayer]

Well I won't be buying a new video card for awhile, if ever.

What settings could I play BC2 at?

Depends at what resolution and what kind of fps you want. I agree with those above that say that you should play videogames at your native resolution (1440x900). For the desktop, do what you have to do but games should be at native.

You might be OK with everything set to low. If you try it at medium, you will have many parts where you are below 30fps. Try it at medium and see what you think. If I had that monitor and wanted to see max details (or close to max). I would run at least a 5770 or GTX 260. BC2 is a demanding game on videocards.

 

[Noobtastic]

Depends at what resolution and what kind of fps you want. I agree with those above that say that you should play videogames at your native resolution (1440x900). For the desktop, do what you have to do but games should be at native.

You might be OK with everything set to low. If you try it at medium, you will have many parts where you are below 30fps. Try it at medium and see what you think. If I had that monitor and wanted to see max details (or close to max). I would run at least a 5770 or GTX 260. BC2 is a demanding game on videocards.

low? are you fucking kidding me?

here are my specs:

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6420 @ 2.13GHz

512 MB Graphics card (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260

2 gigs of ram

there is no way i can get another videocard, it just isn't happening.

What if i play BC2 at a different resolution other than 1400 x 900. ive always played at lower resolutions on this monitor. I just stated playing with the native as per recommendation, but i personally cannot tell the difference.

if its a performance issue, ill gladly go to a lower resolution for higher visuals and effects.

fucckkkk

 

[edplayer]

GTX 260???

you posted GT 240 throughout the thread and in the title.


My computer has a Q9550 and 4GB of ram. A stock 9600GT is maybe around 5% faster than a stock (GDDR5) GT 240. My card is factory overclocked to 740/1850/1000

Did not run well at 1920x1080. Many times it was in the 20~25 fps range. I even saw it drop below 15fps. I tried it at 1680x1050 and it was a little better but still not acceptable. I think I tried it at 1440x900 but I don't remember. Anyways I didn't like it even at the lowest setting so I sold the game. All these were at medium, 1XAA and HBAO off. Didn't try low settings.


I think if you try low at 1440x900 you might be able to keep it mostly over 30fps but I'm not sure.

You can try lower resolutions. Like was posted above, I recommend that you stick to a similar aspect ratio (16:10) and the next lowest one is 1280x800. Not sure if that is an option in the menu but you will find out if you buy it (or just ask someone here to check for you). Maybe you can play that res on medium. I'm not sure. Bad Company 2 is a demanding game. I'm sad cause it made me realize that my 9600GT is past its prime. I was surprised that it could handle so many games at 1920x1080 but BC2 showed me that its about time to move on...

 

[toyota]

with that 2.13 cpu there will be dips under 30 no matter what video card is being used. at 1440x900 I would certainly think the gt240 could manage medium settings without a problem. again many of the dips are going to be because of the cpu anyway so might as well try running high settings to see how it goes.

heck even with all max settings including HBAO and 4x AA a gt240 can average 30 fps at 1280x1024 which is slightly higher res than 1440x900. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/battlefield-bad-company-2_7.html#sect0 so I imagine that on high settings without AA or HBAO on that the gt240 could easily average 40 fps IF his cpu was a bit faster.

 

[edplayer]

it could average 30fps but it also goes as low as 20. That's why I said it could probably do low and maybe medium. Depends on what fps he finds acceptable.

But your point about the cpu is true. That test was done using an i7 975 at 3333MHz



and from that same review, a 5770 hits a low of 30fps at 1280x1024 which is why I was suggesting it

 

[Noobtastic]

GOD DAMNIT.

I'm so pissed off I didn't get the 9800GT after looking at the price difference.

$5 difference at Frys without rebate!

http://www.frys.com/product/5932644?...H:MAIN_RSLT_PG

http://www.frys.com/product/6219280?...H:MAIN_RSLT_PG

i guess with the rebate it's a tad cheaper but damnit!

would i be able to play BC2 far better on a 9800Gt than a 240GT?

God that is such bullshit. I was this close to buying the 9800 but the best buy guy and his buddy were so bent on the gt240. FUCK!

i really do hate myself and would like to return it but it simply is not an option at all.

is there a way i can overclock the gt240? ive never done that before.

a more off-topic question, after redeeming a rebate, does that mean you can no longer return the product to the store or manufacturer?

edit: would more ram improve frame rate and performance? i could easily afford another gig..

 

[blanketyblank]

yes 9800gt would be faster.
1 gig more ram probably won't help.
OC the cpu first to about 3Ghz+, only then try OCing the gt240.