lower end card suggestions needed

[apoppin]

Their equally wrong in methode.

However the 6450 is a slow arsed htpc card, that no one likely buys for gameing. Ultimately its performance in gameing doesnt really matter much for most of the people that buy it.

The 460 is differnt, as if the level of overclock. You game with it, its a serious gameing card for alot of people. This makes it the greater evil in most peoples eyes probably.

Also you justified the 460 oc review by putting small text of (oc) next to the 460 in some of your benchmark results right? Didnt you just do the same with the 6450?

Thanks for the acknowledgement ... i thought i might be alone in thinking that both companies do the exact same thing.

i DO get it. We are gamers here and we are outraged that it happened to 'us' by Nvidia. OtOH, who cares about the people who get it done to them by AMD? Yes, it is called a "double standard".

As to my own tech site, we *feature* overclocking of the featured card in our launch reviews. The FTW GTX 460 was benched right alongside the Galaxy OC and the stock GTX 460 - each was clearly labeled.

And on my current evaluation, i put the HIS HD 6450-DDR3 directly against the stock GT 520; and in the performance summary you can ALSO see the (overclocked to 750MHz non-existent outside of AMD's samples) GDDR5 version of the HD 6450 against the overclocked GT 520.

As an *added bonus*, i did something you cannot usually do with a faster card. i lowered the speed of the GDDR5 HD 6450 and raised the speed of the DDR3 card for a direct comparison.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

So you think it is OK that AMD sends *only* GDDR5 versions of HD 6450 that were impossible to find at the time - only one SKU by their big partner made at 625MHz - but the TEST CARD made available to the tech sites is clocked at 750MHz
In fact, there are still no 750MHz GDDR5 HD 6450s yet available (only announced). And these are the ones that the reviewers put against the GT 520 for the HD 6450 launch (while the DDR3 versions have been common since the launch).

On the other hand, Nvidia is *evil* for sending out overclocked GTX 460s that never ran of stock ....


Please explain the difference to me; i am confused. i see outrage on one hand and acquiescence on the other depending only on which vendor does it.

I never mentioned anything about Nvidia. The only "problem" I have with the 460 FTW is that Anandtech did something they usually don't do. They reviewed a specialty card along side the competing reference card launch. The main reason I would have rather seen the 460 FTW have its own dedicated review is to make searching for said review easier. In the article title in which the 460 FTW was reviewed, there was no mention of the 460 FTW. If you search "460 FTW" via anandtech you are given to the 6870 launch article, with no mention of the 460 in the title, as the third result from top. In the past they reviewed specialty cards on their own: The Gigabyte GTX 260 Super Duper Overclock. The backlash was so controversial with the 6870 launch their next specialty card - The XFX 6870 Black Edition -did get its own review when AMD(?) sent it out during the 560 Ti launch.

So I'd rather not be lumped into this double standard you're expressing. And Arkdarel is on the right track: Not as many people really care about these low end cards. So if a double standard did exist, that factor would have to be part of the equation. Low end card target a different audience and market segment, where performance is not as prioritized. This is why you'll see AIBs cut memory bandwidth, use DDR2, use DDR3, and cut clocks but label the card the same as another.

As far as the clocks are concerned, there does seem like miscommunication. On newegg you see this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-377-_-Product
Core Clock: 675MHz (Std 625)

Why is Gigabyte listing 625 as standard, while Anandtech reported 750? If performance isn't a priority, the lower clocked cards would have lower power consumption. So there's a reasonable trade off here despite the possibility of shady tactics, as you put it.

 

[RussianSensation]

yeah im now sorting thorough the AT reviews of the newer ones, the 6450, gt520

Techspot just did a budget Graphics Card roundup for <$150.

Take a look here.

For ~ $150, the best cards are HD5850 and HD6850.
For $100, I suggest a GTX460 768mb.
Otherwise, AMD cards rule the sub $100 market segment --> an HD5750 for $80.

The $100 GTX460 768mb is the perfect budget card for gaming, esp if you take overclocking into account.

 

[Zargon]

Techspot just did a budget Graphics Card roundup for <$150.

Take a look here.

For ~ $150, the best cards are HD5850 and HD6850.
For $100, I suggest a GTX460 768mb.
Otherwise, AMD cards rule the sub $100 market segment --> an HD5750 for $80.

The $100 GTX460 768mb is the perfect budget card for gaming, esp if you take overclocking into account.

from my op:

my list of wants/needs are this"
1. low power consumption - the machine uses 40w right now
2. passive is a plus, I have just the top 200mm fan on the p180 mini on low in the system, its whisper quiet
3. handle x234 1080p video and random flash games
4. hdmi out prefered, DVI is fine

only the 5750 is close to those.

I need to edit my OP now, because I ordered a case, and now I need a low profile-able card, and passive is very much preffered now.

OP IS now updated

 

[RussianSensation]

HD5450 Go! Green for $25.

- passive
- fast enough for 1080P (UVD2)
- very low power consumption
- HDMI out
- Adobe Flash video acceleration and post-processing is supported for H.264-encoded content.

More specifications can be found here.

 

[apoppin]

So I'd rather not be lumped into this double standard you're expressing. And Arkdarel is on the right track: Not as many people really care about these low end cards. So if a double standard did exist, that factor would have to be part of the equation. Low end card target a different audience and market segment, where performance is not as prioritized. This is why you'll see AIBs cut memory bandwidth, use DDR2, use DDR3, and cut clocks but label the card the same as another.

As far as the clocks are concerned, there does seem like miscommunication. On newegg you see this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-377-_-Product
Core Clock: 675MHz (Std 625)

Why is Gigabyte listing 625 as standard, while Anandtech reported 750? If performance isn't a priority, the lower clocked cards would have lower power consumption. So there's a reasonable trade off here despite the possibility of shady tactics, as you put it.

No one ever wants to be lumped - period


The OP *cares* about low end cards; far more money is made on these cards by AMD and Nvidia than on their flagship models and look what they do there.

It was to AMD's advantage (and very clever of them, i might add - not making a moral judgment here) to send out SUPER-clocked versions of HD 6450 (750Mhz/GDDR5) to the tech sites without sending the real competitor to GT 520, wouldn't you say?

There is still no 750MHz HD 6450, yet every tech site used that as the standard to compare with the GT 520. Fair at the time (and still now) would be to use the 625MHz version (which is about half as fast).

-- How many tech sites (besides mine) also got a HD 6450-DDR3 version to bench it alongside the GT 520? Their conclusions are universal(ly wrong) that the GT is a slower card.
:whiste:

1. low power consumption - the machine uses 40w right now
2. passive is a plus, I have just the top 200mm fan on the p180 mini on low in the system, its whisper quiet
3. handle x234 1080p video and random flash games
4. hdmi out prefered, DVI is fine

i think that little HIS HD 6450-DDR3 version would be perfect for the OP's needs. i believe it fulfills all of his checklist and can be overclocked easily as a passive card.

 

[Zargon]

HD5450 Go! Green for $25.

- passive
- fast enough for 1080P (UVD2)
- very low power consumption
- HDMI out
- Adobe Flash video acceleration and post-processing is supported for H.264-encoded content.

More specifications can be found here.

thats a nice little deal! too bad you dont get the bracket I need with it

i think that little HIS HD 6450-DDR3 version would be perfect for the OP's needs. i believe it fulfills all of his checklist and can be overclocked easily as a passive card.

its def top o the list at the moment.

SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 5450 1GB 64-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP Ready Low Profile Ready Video Card for 50 with a 15 MIR is tempting.

this ASUS EAH5450 SILENT/DI/512MD2(LP) Radeon HD 5450 512MB 64-bit DDR2 is even cheaper, but DDR2, how slow is this card?


this might be overkill, but its OOS anways: HIS Silence H557HR1G Radeon HD 5570 1GB 128-bit DDR3

 

[cusideabelincoln]

The OP *cares* about low end cards; far more money is made on these cards by AMD and Nvidia than on their flagship models and look what they do there.

Yes, the OP cares, but his workload is one that really isn't going to take advantage of DDR5 over DDR3, since he said he won't be doing any gaming. So the DDR5 version isn't going to give him performance benefits for video playback and playing Flash games. Of this statement I could be wrong, because no on really tests those differences, but I have a strong feeling I'm not. So either the 520 or 6450 would work. But something like a 5450 wouldn't be ideal since it can't handle all of AMD's video acceleration features. The DDR3 6450 is probably ideal since it can handle the OP's needs and should have lower power consumption than the GDDR5 version.

Also do I really have to be extremely specific with everything I say? I'll revise: Nobody on this forum cares so much about these cards because gaming performance is not their target market. These cards do other things which are of equal or higher priority: Power consumption, video playback. This is (one reason) why you don't see the hoopla.

So please don't spin my word choice of "cares". I think you knew exactly what I meant when I said it.

How many tech sites (besides mine) also got a HD 6450-DDR3 version to bench it alongside the GT 520? Their conclusions are universal(ly wrong) that the GT is a slower card.

Their conclusion isn't wrong. Their conclusion is only based on the caveat of the parameters of their test. A 750 MHz GDDR5 6450 is faster than the 520, since that is what they tested with. They would be wrong to lump in the DDR3 version into this conclusion, but that would just be plain silly of them to do.

 

[apoppin]

Yes, the OP cares, but his workload is one that really isn't going to take advantage of DDR5 over DDR3, since he said he won't be doing any gaming. So the DDR5 version isn't going to give him performance benefits for video playback and playing Flash games. Of this statement I could be wrong, because no on really tests those differences, but I have a strong feeling I'm not. So either the 520 or 6450 would work. But something like a 5450 wouldn't be ideal since it can't handle all of AMD's video acceleration features. The DDR3 6450 is probably ideal since it can handle the OP's needs and should have lower power consumption than the GDDR5 version.

Also do I really have to be extremely specific with everything I say? I'll revise: Nobody on this forum cares so much about these cards because gaming performance is not their target market. These cards do other things which are of equal or higher priority: Power consumption, video playback. This is (one reason) why you don't see the hoopla.

So please don't spin my word choice of "cares". I think you knew exactly what I meant when I said it.


Their conclusion isn't wrong. Their conclusion is only based on the caveat of the parameters of their test. A 750 MHz GDDR5 6450 is faster than the 520, since that is what they tested with. They would be wrong to lump in the DDR3 version into this conclusion, but that would just be plain silly of them to do.

AMD made very sure not to send the tech sites any DDR3 versions off the HD 6450 - but only to send them the Halo product which does not exist anywhere yet.

NONE of the HD 6450-DDR5 review site's conclusions are right versus the GT 530 - unless you can find one for me to actually BUY
---HD 6450 at 750MHz/900MHz w/GDDR5 does not exist - unlike with the FTW GTX 460 which never went out of stock.

i guess you are OK with that - but you still say it is wrong of Nvidia to do the same thing? --it is very clear to me what double standards are.

 

[Madcatatlas]

Your are arguing prinicipal matters?

In that case i agree, Nvidia and its business practices have basicly set the standard for how low one can go in fooling customers and reviewers alike.

If AMD had not followed suit, the average joe would just see Anandtech reviewing one higher clocked gpu/cpu after the other in favor of the competitor.

AMD have realized how they need to market stuff to win and if they manage to sell more and win more than Nvidia/intel, they will outwit nvidia at their own game, even with subpar tech, as in both Intels and Nvidias case on several occasions.


Double standards in this case, is just a term used by people who didnt spend enough time critisizing nvidias initial step and who now think "hey look its not just nvidia doing it", validates their own initial viewpoint. When infact you should have condemned such practices much more from the start.

That would lend way more credibility to your now apparant rant about a niche product in terms of this being a forum mostly for entusiasts and specially interested people. Dont come here with a "AMD sells way more 6450s than 6970" as an argument about niche. Compared to what the 460 FTW and other highly overclocked card was for nvidia, the 6450 couldnt hold a candle.


basicly, now that the score is even, come back when AMD does the next such move on a highend product.

 

[apoppin]

It is pretty clear that you do not understand at all what my role is.

i am not taking any sides. My position is from one of knowledge of what goes on inside the industry and reporting it to you. i am not condemning what AMD or Nvidia does. My evaluations in both cases are neutral and i went to great lengths to make sure that my readers got the "real" HD 6450 benches as well as the overclocked (non-existent) overclocked GDDR5 "halo" version of HD 6450 that the other sites exclusively used versus the GT 520.

You guys decide the moral implications. i just found it interesting that there is "selective outrage" - depending on which company does it. That is the only thing my "rant" is about - you guys who are acting as apologists for the exact same thing that you recently vehemently attacked.

As to "who did it first", you would have to go back through Tech history and there are tracks of this happening from the very beginning. It is visible as an established pattern.

. . .. come back when AMD does the next such move on a highend product.

And AMD *already* did it *again* on a highend product - the HD 6990 with their unsupported "AUSUM" switch - So this is the second time this year.
:whiste:

Your are arguing prinicipal matters?

In that case i agree, Nvidia and its business practices have basicly set the standard for how low one can go in fooling customers and reviewers alike.

If AMD had not followed suit, the average joe would just see Anandtech reviewing one higher clocked gpu/cpu after the other in favor of the competitor.

AMD have realized how they need to market stuff to win and if they manage to sell more and win more than Nvidia/intel, they will outwit nvidia at their own game, even with subpar tech, as in both Intels and Nvidias case on several occasions.


Double standards in this case, is just a term used by people who didnt spend enough time critisizing nvidias initial step and who now think "hey look its not just nvidia doing it", validates their own initial viewpoint. When infact you should have condemned such practices much more from the start.

That would lend way more credibility to your now apparant rant about a niche product in terms of this being a forum mostly for entusiasts and specially interested people. Dont come here with a "AMD sells way more 6450s than 6970" as an argument about niche. Compared to what the 460 FTW and other highly overclocked card was for nvidia, the 6450 couldnt hold a candle.


basicly, now that the score is even, come back when AMD does the next such move on a highend product.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

i guess you are OK with that - but you still say it is wrong of Nvidia to do the same thing? --it is very clear to me what double standards are.

What the hell? Why are you putting words into my mouth? Don't make straw men. I'm simply telling you why you don't see the hoopla. I haven't made any commentary about either company doing it. There is a double standard... a standard for low end parts and a standard for high end parts. On these forums no one gets buzzed about the low end sector like the high end. It's pretty simple really. I really think you are creating the illusion of no-outrage. Someone has to start the outrage, after all? Who starts those outrages? People who care. People who are available. I'll wager the people who don't care and are not available are the reason you don't see the outrage, because if they were then you would definitely see it. (Seriously, this forum has been slow the last week).

So same thing? The context is slightly different. Like I've already mentioned, this is a low end part compared to a high end one. This is also new product release and the GTX 460 had been available for months. AIBs have chosen produce the cheapest variation of that part at launch in a very crowded market segment. And IIRC the FTW edition did sell out for a short time after those articles went up.

You don't want to openly condemn/condone the companies, yet you are quick to openly judge us. :thumbsdown: :whiste: :\ :sneaky:

 

[apoppin]

No straw man!

Please go on the record right now and say what you feel about what AMD just did with their non-existent Halo HD 6450-GDDR5 version. How DO you feel about it?

If not you specifically, then this forum *is* generally minimizing what AMD has done with the HD 6450 while at the same time condemning Nvidia for the same thing. Even to a silly response like "Nvidia started it"


i am not here to condemn anyone. i am here to report.

What the hell? Why are you putting words into my mouth? Don't make straw men. I'm simply telling you why you don't see the hoopla. I haven't made any commentary about either company doing it. There is a double standard... a standard for low end parts and a standard for high end parts. On these forums no one gets buzzed about the low end sector like the high end. It's pretty simple really. I really think you are creating the illusion of no-outrage. Someone has to start the outrage, after all? Who starts those outrages? People who care. People who are available. I'll wager the people who don't care and are not available are the reason you don't see the outrage, because if they were then you would definitely see it. (Seriously, this forum has been slow the last week).

So same thing? The context is slightly different. Like I've already mentioned, this is a low end part compared to a high end one. This is also new product release and the GTX 460 had been available for months. AIBs have chosen produce the cheapest variation of that part at launch in a very crowded market segment. And IIRC the FTW edition did sell out for a short time after those articles went up.

You don't want to openly condemn/condone the companies, yet you are quick to openly judge us. :thumbsdown: :whiste: :\ :sneaky:

 

[cusideabelincoln]

If not you specifically, then this forum *is* generally minimizing what AMD has done with the HD 6450 while at the same time condemning Nvidia for the same thing. Even to a silly response like "Nvidia started it"

I really don't think the same people who cared about the 460 FTW are even posting often, and if they are they don't care at all about these low end parts. I bet they don't even take the time to read the articles. This is why I don't think you should be making this generalization for products in completely different market segments, on a forum who first and foremost cares about the performance market the 6450 does not reside in. Do I need to repeat myself? This forum has been much slower, with fewer faces posting, over this last week. So if they're not here, and/or they don't care about this market segment, then how can you say they are or are not minimizing?

On record: If there are never going to be 750 MHz GDDR5 versions on the market, then it is misleading. But there is a 625 MHZ GDDR5 version available. And there is only one. I'm sure we'll see more. Since AMD has made the "reference" design flexible, is it not up to the AIBs who decide what performance to make these cards? AMD clearly lists different specs for the 6450: http://www.amd.com/us/products/desk...d-6450/pages/amd-radeon-hd-6450-overview.aspx

As long as reviewers clearly noted what specs their 6450 was, like Anandtech did, and take note there will be multiple versions, like Anandtech did, I don't see much of a problem in a market segment with historically widely different performance designs bearing the same exact model name. So long some AIB makes the top card in the near future.

 

[Arkadrel]

You guys are kinda off topic....

@Zargon

The 5570 @50$ ish is still unparalled value at its price.
So if your going for a lowend card, you should get one of those.

 

[apoppin]

I really don't think the same people who cared about the 460 FTW are even posting often, and if they are they don't care at all about these low end parts. I bet they don't even take the time to read the articles. This is why I don't think you should be making this generalization for products in completely different market segments, on a forum who first and foremost cares about the performance market the 6450 does not reside in. Do I need to repeat myself? This forum has been much slower, with fewer faces posting, over this last week. So if they're not here, and/or they don't care about this market segment, then how can you say they are or are not minimizing?

On record: If there are never going to be 750 MHz GDDR5 versions on the market, then it is misleading. But there is a 625 MHZ GDDR5 version available. And there is only one. I'm sure we'll see more. Since AMD has made the "reference" design flexible, is it not up to the AIBs who decide what performance to make these cards? AMD clearly lists different specs for the 6450: http://www.amd.com/us/products/desk...d-6450/pages/amd-radeon-hd-6450-overview.aspx

As long as reviewers clearly noted what specs their 6450 was, like Anandtech did, and take note there will be multiple versions, like Anandtech did, I don't see much of a problem in a market segment with historically widely different performance designs bearing the same exact model name. So long some AIB makes the top card in the near future.

Thanks for going on the record and confirming what i said about the obvious double standard that exists here including your own apologies for AMD. You are clearly OK with AMD sending a Halo non-existent card to the tech sites as long as "some AIB makes the top card in the near future".


:\

As to the OP's needs, i cannot see a better card than that passsive HIS HD 6450 that i got from NewEgg.

--BtW,, does anybody want a Super-Clocked 'Halo' (750/1800MHz) GDDR5 version of HD 6450 that doesn't exist anywhere else but as a sample?
-----it's loud but it overclocks great to 830/2000MHz and makes the GT 520 look bad . . . If i won't need it for benching any longer, maybe AMD will let us give it away in our current contest.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Thanks for going on the record and confirming what i said about the obvious double standard that exists here including your own apologies for AMD. You are clearly OK with AMD sending a Halo non-existent card to the tech sites as long as "some AIB makes the top card in the near future".

Thanks for the passive aggressiveness and generalizations, and also not reading any of the arguments I put forth. You were dead set on your own conclusion from the get go and have been unwilling to acknowledge how the context could possibly be different, when all I've done is present alternate and more complete points of views. All so that you can call people hypocrites, in a thinly veiled manner, in a possibly unwarranted manner.

Keep on trucking with that stubbornness. And yes, keep using that straw man.

 

[18TommyBoy]

Jessus... I read half hour but I dont know which is better?

6450 (DDR3 1600Mhz) and 1-2GB ram
or
6450 (DDR5 3200Mhz) and 512MB ram?

And to crossfire with 7480D (APU 5300) what of these types going? (IGP has a Mhz of RAM like 1866Mhz...)
AMD can only this say: