Upgrading video card

[Rhezuss]

Ok now with all the choices available at low prices, I really don't know which one to choose from and mostly, should I wait for a price drop in the 57xx series.

Other thing, is DX11 cards that such needed now...

I rounded up to those:

- Sparkle GTS250 512mb (122CAD on newegg.ca, which is a nice price, including WOW+3D vision glasses, 143CAD including H&S and taxes)
- XFX HD 4870 512mb (155CAD on newegg.ca)
- Sapphire HD 5750 512mb (137CAD on newegg.ca)
- Sapphire HD 5770 1gb (170CAD on newegg.ca)

The GTS250 is really tempting at this price (plus selling my 9600GT could lower that price by 50%) and would be a nice upgrade from my 9600GT. In a year, I could upgrade to a DX11 card.

 

[happy medium]

At that price the gts 250 looks to be the best offer.

 

[Rhezuss]

Originally posted by: happy medium
At that price the gts 250 looks to be the best offer.

How about a Sapphire HD 4850 512mb for 103CAD??!? Hehehh

But the GTS250 would be better I think.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Hey...a little bumpy question...

I really want to upgrade my video card...it's maing me crazy...hehehh

So, from a 9600Gt, would a HD 5750 would be a nice upgrade, since i'll probably get Windows 7 before the end of the year and for the DX11 future games?

if you still have the 4600 X2 then you arent going to see much improvement especially at just 1280. I guarantee you your minimum framerates will be the same in almost every game no matter what card you go with over your current 9600gt. when I had a 5000 X2 and much wimpier 8600gt I had the same minimum framerates in many games no matter what other faster card I tried in that system. a 9600gt is not too bad for a 4600 X2 but anything any faster will mostly go down the drain.

I dont care what theories some people on here I have because I tried various cards including 7600gt, 8600gt, 9600gt, 8800gt, and 4670 in my 5000 X2 system and know what to expect. at 1280 the 8800gt was basically dead even with the 9600gt and never gave more than 1-2fps in any benchmark. I could go into more details but the point is with your 4600 X2 your are not going to see hardly any playable difference at all upgrading your 9600gt.

 

[Rhezuss]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Hey...a little bumpy question...

I really want to upgrade my video card...it's maing me crazy...hehehh

So, from a 9600Gt, would a HD 5750 would be a nice upgrade, since i'll probably get Windows 7 before the end of the year and for the DX11 future games?

if you still have the 4600 X2 then you arent going to see much improvement especially at just 1280. I guarantee you your minimum framerates will be the same in almost every game no matter what card you go with over your current 9600gt. when I had a 5000 X2 and much wimpier 8600gt I had the same minimum framerates in many games no matter what other faster card I tried in that system. a 9600gt is not too bad for a 4600 X2 but anything any faster will mostly go down the drain.

I dont care what theories some people on here I have because I tried various cards including 7600gt, 8600gt, 9600gt, 8800gt, and 4670 in my 5000 X2 system and know what to expect. at 1280 the 8800gt was basically dead even with the 9600gt and never gave more than 1-2fps in any benchmark. I could go into more details but the point is with your 4600 X2 your are not going to see hardly any playable difference at all upgrading your 9600gt.

I'm now with a not much better (but the upgrade cost me, after selling the other parts, 50CAD) A64 X2 5200+ and 4gb DDR2-800 (instead of A64 X2 4600+ and 3gb of DDR400).

You bring good points tho, i'm gonna think about it this weekend and see if the urge goes by ehheh. Thanks for your replies!

 

[cbn]

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Other thing, I bought the AM2CPU board for the mobo. With that, I can upgrade to a AM2 CPU and DDR2...

Would it worth it to get an AM2 CPU, at least trying to find one?

Back when I was deciding on my Conroe system I noticed the AM2 was about 1% slower than the equivalent 939. (In fact, I think I got this information from an Anandtech review)

So I would just keep the 939 unless a much higher binned AM2 subsequently became available.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: Just learning

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Other thing, I bought the AM2CPU board for the mobo. With that, I can upgrade to a AM2 CPU and DDR2...

Would it worth it to get an AM2 CPU, at least trying to find one?

Back when I was deciding on my Conroe system I noticed the AM2 was about 1% slower than the equivalent 939. (In fact, I think I got this information from an Anandtech review)

So I would just keep the 939 unless a much higher binned AM2 subsequently became available.

There are much faster processors available for AM2 than there is for 939 (and certainly much faster than his 4600+), even in the budget segment.

 

[Rhezuss]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

Originally posted by: Just learning

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Other thing, I bought the AM2CPU board for the mobo. With that, I can upgrade to a AM2 CPU and DDR2...

Would it worth it to get an AM2 CPU, at least trying to find one?

Back when I was deciding on my Conroe system I noticed the AM2 was about 1% slower than the equivalent 939. (In fact, I think I got this information from an Anandtech review)

So I would just keep the 939 unless a much higher binned AM2 subsequently became available.

There are much faster processors available for AM2 than there is for 939 (and certainly much faster than his 4600+), even in the budget segment.

True. Anyway in a year i'll upgrade to the Phenom II or whatever AMD is going to serve us but for now...the Sapphire HD4850 512mb for 102CAd is really tempting me...

 

[bryanW1995]

if your gpu is still doing fine in the games that you're playing I would focus on upgrading the cpu first. I mean a real upgrade, not going to a 5200+ that is 3+ yrs old.

If your mobo supports am2+ then snag that athlon II x4 620 for $99, it will be an enormous upgrade to your current system. Video cards are going to do nothing but drop over the next few months, so when you really need a faster card you'll save some money while you're at it.

 

[Rhezuss]

Ok done, I found a Sapphire HD 4850 512mb for 75CAD!
Gonna go grab it in an hour.

Thanks all for your replies!

 

[Rhezuss]

Ok, I "tested" it yesterday with Risen. I played for about 30 minutes with the 9600GT, runnning around a certain path making sure I see lots of things like forest, combat, water, far background, day and night...The game runs between 15-35 FPS with some stuttering, a little lag, hiccups, etc. (Settings: no AA/AF, shadows at medium)

Then I tried the same path with the HD 4850...It played smooth all the way. No lag or stuttering. FPS around 40-60 at all times. Tried the game in WoW too and again, a huge diffrence! (Settings: AA/AF 4x, all on high)

From my eyes, it has made a huge difference and for 75CAD it is a steal!

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Ok, I "tested" it yesterday with Risen. I played for about 30 minutes with the 9600GT, runnning around a certain path making sure I see lots of things like forest, combat, water, far background, day and night...The game runs between 15-35 FPS with some stuttering, a little lag, hiccups, etc. (Settings: no AA/AF, shadows at medium)

Then I tried the same path with the HD 4850...It played smooth all the way. No lag or stuttering. FPS around 40-60 at all times. Tried the game in WoW too and again, a huge diffrence! (Settings: AA/AF 4x, all on high)

From my eyes, it has made a huge difference and for 75CAD it is a steal!

that much difference at 1280 with your 2.6 X2? NO WAY. sounds like more exaggeration than anything else. even with a higher end cpu the difference between the 9600gt and 4850 is no where near that. claiming your minimums went up by 170% on a card that is on average only about 35-40% faster under ideal conditions with a high end cpu sounds very unrealistic.

here is a gpu benchmark for Risen. even with an overclocked i7 there isnt remotely that much difference between a 9600gt and a 4890 never mind your 4850. http://www.pcgameshardware.com...deon-HD-5850/Practice/

 

[Rhezuss]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
Ok, I "tested" it yesterday with Risen. I played for about 30 minutes with the 9600GT, runnning around a certain path making sure I see lots of things like forest, combat, water, far background, day and night...The game runs between 15-35 FPS with some stuttering, a little lag, hiccups, etc. (Settings: no AA/AF, shadows at medium)

Then I tried the same path with the HD 4850...It played smooth all the way. No lag or stuttering. FPS around 40-60 at all times. Tried the game in WoW too and again, a huge diffrence! (Settings: AA/AF 4x, all on high)

From my eyes, it has made a huge difference and for 75CAD it is a steal!

that much difference at 1280 with your 2.6 X2? NO WAY. sounds like more exaggeration than anything else. even with a higher end cpu the difference between the 9600gt and 4850 is no where near that. claiming your minimums went up by 170% on a card that is on average only about 35-40% faster under ideal conditions with a high end cpu sounds very unrealistic.

here is a gpu benchmark for Risen. even with an overclocked i7 there isnt remotely that much difference between a 9600gt and a 4890 never mind your 4850. http://www.pcgameshardware.com...deon-HD-5850/Practice/

Ok I lied...IT'S EVEN MORE THAN THAT!!!!

I kid I kid...

Surely I must exaggerate but I see a tangible difference in my games, at least Risen is not lagging AT ALL and that's the simple truth.

 

[bryanW1995]

actually, the mins will often increase a lot on better/faster cards. iirc, the 4850 makes much better use of its memory, so perhaps his 9600gt is running out of memory some times?

Just because a card is only 35-40% faster at theoretical benchmarks doesn't mean that it won't provide an enormous improvement in actual gameplay experience.

If you look more closely at the benchmark you'll notice that there is NO AA being used. The OP used 4xAA, which will greatly widen the gap between 4850 and 9600gt. G92 sucked at AA, it was not much better than 3xxx.


Rhezuss, don't let toyota drag you down. he is too busy reading this info on websites to believe somebody's actual experience using the card

 

[crisium]

Toyota has a bit of know-it-all syndrome. A 4850 2-3 steps above a 9600GT and thus improvements are expected. Glad to see an old Athlon X2 can still be fine.

 

[Rhezuss]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
actually, the mins will often increase a lot on better/faster cards. iirc, the 4850 makes much better use of its memory, so perhaps his 9600gt is running out of memory some times?

Just because a card is only 35-40% faster at theoretical benchmarks doesn't mean that it won't provide an enormous improvement in actual gameplay experience.

If you look more closely at the benchmark you'll notice that there is NO AA being used. The OP used 4xAA, which will greatly widen the gap between 4850 and 9600gt. G92 sucked at AA, it was not much better than 3xxx.


Rhezuss, don't let toyota drag you down. he is too busy reading this info on websites to believe somebody's actual experience using the card

Oh it's ok, I expect any sorts of comments when I post on forums and don't take them personaly or offensively.

Originally posted by: Crisium
Toyota has a bit of know-it-all syndrome. A 4850 2-3 steps above a 9600GT and thus improvements are expected. Glad to see an old Athlon X2 can still be fine.

That's what I realised. At first I was looking at TH GPU Charts and the 4850 was a little above the 9600GT so it was not that appealing. But when I saw someone living near me was selling his 4850 for a mere 75CAD, I was why not try it, it can't be worst...and I was really impressed, even on an aging X2.

Thanks for your comments!

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Crisium
Toyota has a bit of know-it-all syndrome. A 4850 2-3 steps above a 9600GT and thus improvements are expected. Glad to see an old Athlon X2 can still be fine.

obviously I know more than you do if you actually believe what he claims. why dont you look at the Risen benchmarks? he is clearly gone WAY beyond exaggeration with his claims. :roll:

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
actually, the mins will often increase a lot on better/faster cards. iirc, the 4850 makes much better use of its memory, so perhaps his 9600gt is running out of memory some times?

Just because a card is only 35-40% faster at theoretical benchmarks doesn't mean that it won't provide an enormous improvement in actual gameplay experience.

If you look more closely at the benchmark you'll notice that there is NO AA being used. The OP used 4xAA, which will greatly widen the gap between 4850 and 9600gt. G92 sucked at AA, it was not much better than 3xxx.


Rhezuss, don't let toyota drag you down. he is too busy reading this info on websites to believe somebody's actual experience using the card

use some common sense. not even with an overclocked i7 would that kind of jump be possible going from a 9600gt to a 4850 especially at just 1280. look at the benchmarks for the game since that obviously backs up what i am saying. this is tech forum not freaking youtube where people can just make outlandish claims.

yeah why use common sense or look at benchmarks when all we have to do is take peoples word? lol. with my new gtx285 I get 90fps in Crysis DX10 very high settings which is twice as much as i got with my gtx260. surely you believe me even though not a single benchmark using those cards would say that is possible right? after all it is my "actual experience" as you say. :roll:

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Rhezuss

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
actually, the mins will often increase a lot on better/faster cards. iirc, the 4850 makes much better use of its memory, so perhaps his 9600gt is running out of memory some times?

Just because a card is only 35-40% faster at theoretical benchmarks doesn't mean that it won't provide an enormous improvement in actual gameplay experience.

If you look more closely at the benchmark you'll notice that there is NO AA being used. The OP used 4xAA, which will greatly widen the gap between 4850 and 9600gt. G92 sucked at AA, it was not much better than 3xxx.


Rhezuss, don't let toyota drag you down. he is too busy reading this info on websites to believe somebody's actual experience using the card

Oh it's ok, I expect any sorts of comments when I post on forums and don't take them personaly or offensively.

Originally posted by: Crisium
Toyota has a bit of know-it-all syndrome. A 4850 2-3 steps above a 9600GT and thus improvements are expected. Glad to see an old Athlon X2 can still be fine.

That's what I realised. At first I was looking at TH GPU Charts and the 4850 was a little above the 9600GT so it was not that appealing. But when I saw someone living near me was selling his 4850 for a mere 75CAD, I was why not try it, it can't be worst...and I was really impressed, even on an aging X2.

Thanks for your comments!

its not anything personal but what you are claiming is complete nonsense. its not even remotely possible to have that kind of jump going from a 9600gt to a 4850. throw in the fact that you are using a 2.6 X2 at just 1280 and that makes it even more outlandish. even that Risen benchmark I linked you to shows you would likely only be getting 3-4 more fps at 1280 even if you had overclocked i7.

 

[crisium]

That benchmark you linked to is with the game at max settings + 16AF. He runs medium shadows and no AF. How the hell do you know max shadows and AF don't make it more CPU limited? See how that makes you a know-it-all? You don't know. The drivers could be different. New Catalyst drivers might be awesome now in Risen. etc... ugh I'm not gonna argue much further than saying this:

frak the frames-per-second, if he notices less stutter then it worked great for him. I mean why are you even arguing that he lies? To try to persuade people from upgrading from a 9600GT to a 4850? He got a good deal on the card and you cannot deny that it's a superior card and is gonna be faster virtually every time.

I mean, I upgraded from a factory OC'd 3850 to a 4850. Even OC'd a 3850 is for sure a bit slower than a 9600GT, but I noticed a huge difference in my games (forget Risen for a second) and even if he notices just 2/3 of that difference then I know it made quite a big impact.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Crisium
That benchmark you linked to is with the game at max settings + 16AF. He runs medium shadows and no AF. How the hell do you know max shadows and AF don't make it more CPU limited? See how that makes you a know-it-all? You don't know. The drivers could be different. New Catalyst drivers might be awesome now in Risen. etc... ugh I'm not gonna argue much further than saying this:

frak the frames-per-second, if he notices less stutter then it worked great for him. I mean why are you even arguing that he lies? To try to persuade people from upgrading from a 9600GT to a 4850? He got a good deal on the card and you cannot deny that it's a superior card and is gonna be faster virtually every time.

what difference does it make because the percentages between the cards are still the same no matter what settings they use? is a 4890 getting twice the framerates as a 9600gt? no not even 50% better. so how the hell would just a 4850 get twice the performance of a 9600gt? they also use an overclocked i7 so he would be more cpu limited at 1280 then they are which means theres no way he had that big of a jump between the 9600gt and 4850. turning down the settings wouldnt even matter that much at 1280 since again he would be much more cpu limited with that 2.6 X2. USE COMMON SENSE. no way in hell would he get a 2.7 times increase in minimum framerate at a cpu limited res like 1280 even if he had a faster cpu. its NOT even close.

facts are facts and in that benchmark the 4870 is only 25%-30% faster than a 9600gt and we all know that card is a pretty good bit faster than a 4850 dont we? that benchmark clearly shows that even if he had an overclocked i7 he would only be looking at 15-20% increase from a 9600gt to a 4850 at best for that res. and realistically with his 2.6 X2 it would not even be that big of a difference.

 

[crisium]

I thought I was quite clear when I said "frak the frames-per-second". Stop throwing around percentages and FPS. If he says there's less stutter now than there's less stutter now. Buy a plane ticket and visit him if you don't believe him.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Crisium
I thought I was quite clear when I said "frak the frames-per-second". Stop throwing around percentages and FPS. If he says there's less stutter now than there's less stutter now. Buy a plane ticket and visit him if you don't believe him.

I didnt discount the less stutter part. I discounted the insane framerate increase he was claiming.

 

[Rhezuss]

/popcorn
/enjoy

Anyhow, I really like the results, my eyes like what they see...

/popcorn
/enjoy

 

[bryanW1995]

toyota, why don't you quit talking about theories and actually DO something. buy/borrow a 9600gt and a 4850, get the op's cpu settings and clock yours at a similar level, find out the op's actual in game settings, then either prove or disprove his statements. unless and until you do that you are bringing a few pieces of paper with tech specs to a swordfight. The only thing you can do is accuse him of lying, but he has no reason to make this up. He said that his subjective experience is much much better, deal with it.