Really Confused

G

Guest

Guest
For the past month I have been reading up on graphics cards and doing research on what graphics card to buy. I am currently still a student so therefore cash is some what limited. I have enough for a Gigabyte GTX 260 but would like to know if it's worth going for that or just a 9800GTX. What is the difference between the Gigabyte version to the XFX and ASUS because it's about 10% cheaper from the store I plan to buy it from? I would really appreciate it if someone could advise me because so many people are saying so many different things it really just confuses me.

Thanx

CJ
 

pcgamer12

Distinguished
May 1, 2008
1,089
0
19,280
4850 or 4870 are better cards. 4850 is prices at $200 but can be found for less. 4870 is priced at $300 but due to high demand and low supply price as of right now is more like $309. At $200, a 9800GTX or 4850 will offer very similar performance. At the $300-$400 range, a 4870 will lay smack on the GTX 260 in many games. Nvidia is going to lower prices for their GTX 260 and GTX 280.
 
Agree with evongugg except he is thinking of the 4870. The 4850 is equal to ~15% better than the 9800GTX+. If you really want some performance for small $, depending on your motherboard, CrossFire 2 4850's for ~$320 after volume discounts and MIR's. Even the 9800GX2 @ $420 is faster than the GTX 280.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Wow thanx for the speedy reply. I would like to stay faithfull to nvidia as i have never owned an ATI card. Would the GTX 260 be a better card for future games as apposed to the 9800GTX? And is there a difference between the Gigabyte version as opposed to the ASUS BFG and XFX because im very suspicious about it being 10% cheaper.
 
Currently all of the new generation cards use reference designs. They are all the same except the warranty and possibly factory overclocks.

Yes, the GTX 260 will be ~20ish% faster than the 9800GTX. It will give you more performance in future games but it brings no new tech to the table. You would be better off getting a 9800GX2 if you insist on staying with nVidia. As I said earlier, in nearly every game it is faster than the big daddy GTX 280. Costs about the same as the GTX 260 even. As the GT 200 chip brings nothing new to the table, you should get what gives you the best bang for the $$ regardless of the generation.
 

pauldh

Illustrious
Yes, the GTX260 will be better for future games, it's better for current games too. But... I just have a hard time recommending the GTX260 because you can match or beat it for $300. It needs to be a $300 card (in the USA), not a $400 card.

Avoiding either ATI or Nvidia means throughout the years you are eliminating the best bang for the buck for you. Right now, the HD4870 offers GTX 260 performance for 25% less money. Crossfire HD4850 will often crush the GTX 260 for the same money.

Sticking to NVidia, your best bang for buck vs the GTX 260 would be SLI $130-200 cards (8800GT, GTS 512MB, 9800GTX), which generally are >= the GTX280. If you don't have an SLI mobo, then the 9800GX2 is >= the GTX 280 for the price of the 260.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Thanx dude. appreciate all the information. The 9800GX2 is 40% more than the GTX 260. I'm using percentages because I'm from South Africa and don't want to do the conversion. The 9800GX2 is way out of my price so if the GTX 260 is faster than the 9800GTX I think i'l settle with that.
 
If that is how it stacks up in your area and you insist on nVidia than it is probably what you are looking for. If you are building the system from scratch, you should look into what pauldh suggested. A SLI Mb with 2 8800GT's would still be faster but it is hard for me to say what it will cost you.
Either way, the GTX 260 is still a good card and you will have a nice machine so best of luck with your new build!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Thanx guys. Unfortunately things are expensive my side so even the SLI configuration of the cards you suggested will end up being 20% more. So thanx again for everything.