| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 108067 | 2010-03-12 08:31:00 | New video card - HD5770, HD4890 or GTX260? | Agent_24 (57) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 866586 | 2010-03-12 08:31:00 | I hope to be upgrading my video card in a week or two, it seems a toss up between these three: HD5770, HD4890, GTX260 They're all about the same price, but I can only pick one... I'll want to be able to run the latest games on decent graphics settings and at maximum 1280x1024 but most of the time I'll only be using 1024x768 or 1152x864 actually. I currently have an 8600GT Which would you recommend and why? |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 866587 | 2010-03-12 09:24:00 | I've got a GTX260 and it's a great card, at the mo the next gen ATI cards seem to be the best bang for buck though. Any of those cards will be fine for what you've described. I'd go for the 5770 due to power savings/latest directx etc. | wratterus (105) | ||
| 866588 | 2010-03-12 09:29:00 | At the res you're at, any of the three really, but for the best it will have to be the 4890. | qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 866589 | 2010-03-12 19:26:00 | At the res you're at, any of the three really, but for the best it will have to be the 4890. Why? I've got a GTX260 and it's a great card, at the mo the next gen ATI cards seem to be the best bang for buck though. Any of those cards will be fine for what you've described. I'd go for the 5770 due to power savings/latest directx etc. I'd have no problem powering any of them, but a cooler running card would always be nice. DirectX 11 support would be good too I guess, but does the HD5770 actually have enough performance to back it up? |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 866590 | 2010-03-12 19:28:00 | Why? I'd have no problem powering any of them, but a cooler running card would always be nice. DirectX 11 support would be good too I guess, but does the HD5770 actually have enough performance to back it up? The 4890 is the best card for performance 5770 is about the same as a 4870 but with dx11 etc GTX 260 is about the same as a 4870 but more expensive Its hard to find a 4890 so id go with the 5770 and OC to 4890 speeds |
Ollie (794) | ||
| 866591 | 2010-03-12 19:44:00 | Hi Wrat, I guess its already said, the fastest is the older gen Radeon, 4890, the 5770 has dx11....BUT, none would break a sweat with the resolution you have so you might as well go with the one with the most features and that would be the GTX260, CUDA and PhysX...actually you could use the 8600 as dedicated physX | SolMiester (139) | ||
| 866592 | 2010-03-12 19:52:00 | I agree. The first number is the generation of card. The second number indicates performance. 48xx is better then 57xx, but the 57xx comes out around the same (ish) because it is a later generation. Among other things. That's why benchmarks a good, look up the ones you are interested and see what performs better. Although I never look at the x7xx anything. As far as I am concerned the logical progression is 4890, 5890, etc. Or even better, 5870x2. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 866593 | 2010-03-12 21:18:00 | Hi Wrat, I guess its already said, the fastest is the older gen Radeon, 4890, the 5770 has dx11....BUT, none would break a sweat with the resolution you have so you might as well go with the one with the most features and that would be the GTX260, CUDA and PhysX...actually you could use the 8600 as dedicated physX The GTX260 doesn't have DX11 though does it? I agree. The first number is the generation of card. The second number indicates performance. 48xx is better then 57xx, but the 57xx comes out around the same (ish) because it is a later generation. Among other things. That's why benchmarks a good, look up the ones you are interested and see what performs better. Although I never look at the x7xx anything. As far as I am concerned the logical progression is 4890, 5890, etc. Or even better, 5870x2. I looked up the performance of them, they all seem pretty similar. I'm just wondering which one makes the most sense. A 5870x2 would be great but it costs too much and wouldn't fit in my case anyway :lol: |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 866594 | 2010-03-12 23:08:00 | The GTX260 doesn't have DX11 though does it? I looked up the performance of them, they all seem pretty similar. I'm just wondering which one makes the most sense. A 5870x2 would be great but it costs too much and wouldn't fit in my case anyway :lol: Yea the 5770 is about equivalent to a 4870 but maybe around 20% slower than a 4890. No the GTX260 does not have DX11. I wouldn't worry about DX11 atm. Its unlikely most of the mid ranged cards like the 5770 have the grunt to run DX11 in all its glory when its fully utilised in a few years. Not talking about a few token DX11 effects we are getting added to a few games now. As for PhysX, it does have some tangible benefits in a few games but the CPU could easily do the same work in most cases. The push to utilise it is a attempt by Nvidia to steer users towards there brand. The jury is out if this t attic will be successful long term. Its up to you what value you put on it. |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 866595 | 2010-03-13 07:17:00 | Why? At low resolutions the video card has less to work for, at least on the memory side of things.....in quite a few games the difference between an expensive video card and a cheaper one can be negligible when you're playing at low resolutions. My suggestion at 4890 still stands.....it's cheaper than a 5770, though it has no DX11 support you're not missing much right now, and it has some degree of future proofing. It's still a pretty nice card on its own term. |
qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | |||||