Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Graphics Card for 1366*768

Last response: in Video Games
Share
October 15, 2012 5:44:49 PM

Hi everyone,

I have the following PC system:


Intel core i5 2310 2.9 Ghz
RAM: 4GB DDR3 1333Mhz
Intel HD Graphics 2000

Increasing RAM is not a problem. But if I want to play any game in the market at ultra settings, but at low resolution (1366*768), which graphics card will meet my needs?

Please consider about both price and performance ....

Thank you .... :bounce:  :hello: 

More about : graphics card 1366 768

October 16, 2012 3:49:07 AM

For that particular resolution, a mid ranged budget gpu can fulfill your needs .
For example nvidia gtx 550 ti, nvidia gts 250, nvidia 9800 GT, nvidia 9800 GTX,etc. But remember, that nvidia cards require a whole lot of power, so make sure that you do own a powerful PSU with 30+ amperes on the 12V rail.
If u dont have a powerful PSU then go for ati cards because ati provides a large number of stream processing units compared to nvidia, and consume inevitably low power.
For eg. Ati radeon hd 4850, radeon hd 5650, radeon hd 5750 etc.
Njoy..!!
a b U Graphics card
October 16, 2012 4:00:14 AM

armageddon007 said:
But remember, that nvidia cards require a whole lot of power, so make sure that you do own a powerful PSU with 30+ amperes on the 12V rail.

[rant]
I've never heard such crud in my life. Sure NVidia have their heavy power users, but so do AMD. I mean, NVidia's current lineup are more powerful and more power efficient than AMD's but not by much. The most powerful and the most power efficient is a title that AMD and NVidia have swapped many times with thier different generations of graphics cards. In fact it should be noted that at each price point both AMD and NVidia usually have similarly peforming graphics drawing roughly the same amount of power.
[/rant]

An NVidia GTX550Ti/GT650 or AMD Radeon HD7770/HD7750 should be more than powerful enough for your needs.
Related resources
October 16, 2012 4:08:34 AM

i am being specific about the cards i mentioned. Sorry for not going into enough details..my bad
but aal the nvidia cards i mentioned have an average max TDP of more than 100 Watt.
But the ati cards i mentioned are well below that mark, averaging around 50-60 watts
and u are definitely correct..the newer generations of both ati and nvidia cards are becoming energy efficient..
But earlier cards as i mentioned ....definitely nvidia required a hell lot of power
October 16, 2012 4:08:54 AM

i am being specific about the cards i mentioned. Sorry for not going into enough details..my bad
but all the nvidia cards i mentioned have an average max TDP of more than 100 Watt.
But the ati cards i mentioned are well below that mark, averaging around 50-60 watts
and u are definitely correct..the newer generations of both ati and nvidia cards are becoming energy efficient..
But earlier cards as i mentioned ....definitely nvidia required a hell lot of power
October 16, 2012 4:11:06 AM

i did owned an ATI radeon hd 5650 and it consumed barely 50 watts of power but now i have shifted to nvidia 9800 GTX which requires 120 watts ...
See d difference man..!!
a b U Graphics card
October 16, 2012 4:43:17 AM

I do actually, you moved from a mid/low range AMD card to a high end NVidia card that was a generation older than the one you replaced. The comparison is not on equal terms. The eqivalent ATi card, to the 9800GTX, was the HD4890 which was just as power hungry. The equivalent card to your 5650 would be more along the line of a GT240 or GT230.

You mentioned a GTS250. The 512MB version was simply a 9800GTX with a bios update whereas the 1GB version was a completely different card which did draw a lot less power. I can't say how much because I don't know but it did only have a single pcie 6-pin compared to the dual pcie 6-pin it's 512MB version had.
October 16, 2012 4:26:25 PM

thnxx a lot...for your info..
Got to learn much...lol...
October 16, 2012 4:29:12 PM

thnxx a lot man...
Really...got 2 learn a lot from you...lol...
a c 291 U Graphics card
October 17, 2012 7:39:10 AM

Cards like HD 7750 or GTX 550 Ti will not max games even at 1366x768. I'd suggest looking into GTX 660 if you want to max games like Battlefield 3 or Witcher 2.
October 17, 2012 4:03:43 PM

well...sunius..
U forgot metro 2033
and to be honest on that resolution at ultra, a gtx 550ti produces a framerate of 30-35...if u consider this as unplayable, then it's your choice...
But if u are comfortable with 30-35-40, then its your go...
October 17, 2012 7:20:19 PM

Sunius said:
Cards like HD 7750 or GTX 550 Ti will not max games even at 1366x768. I'd suggest looking into GTX 660 if you want to max games like Battlefield 3 or Witcher 2.



hmm
my reference(and OCed) gtx460 maxes all the above games @ 60 fps avg......
a c 291 U Graphics card
October 18, 2012 5:25:43 AM

don250r said:
hmm
my reference(and OCed) gtx460 maxes all the above games @ 60 fps avg......


No, it doesn't.



GTX 660 barely manages to get over 40 fps.

You don't get 60 fps on Witcher 2 either, more like 20 on max settings.
October 18, 2012 5:52:31 AM

FRAPS must be wrong then......
October 18, 2012 5:58:53 AM

oops!
just ran metro to see and i owe u an apology
but still im getting right at 35~40 fps.....

makes me rethink the 5xx OR 6xx series

long live fermi! :sol: 
a c 147 U Graphics card
October 19, 2012 1:22:03 AM

Sunius said:
Cards like HD 7750 or GTX 550 Ti will not max games even at 1366x768. I'd suggest looking into GTX 660 if you want to max games like Battlefield 3 or Witcher 2.


AFAIK BF3 are more relaxed on the hardware as long as you don't go for MSAA. my older e7500 have way more frame rates in BF3 than BFBC2 though it can be different in MP. :p  . btw is there any hardware able to max out the witcher 2 with ubersampling?
a c 291 U Graphics card
October 19, 2012 7:32:50 AM

Not sure :) . At 720p, my GTX 560 Ti gets 17-20 fps.
!