Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best Bang for your Buck at 1280 x 1024

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 10:17:45 PM

What is the Best Bang for your Buck at 1280 x 1024?

I want to be able to run games at max settings with all eye candy enabled with no lag.

I run windows XP so leave DX10 performance out of consideration.

What is the best deal going now?

Nvidia 9800GT at $119
-or-
ATI HD4850 at $169

Is the $50 increase really worth the extra fraps that the 4850 provides and would I even notice the difference running at 1280 x 1024?


More about : bang buck 1280 1024

October 21, 2008 10:32:19 PM

Probably not, to be honest.
October 21, 2008 10:32:41 PM

rwayne said:
What is the Best Bang for your Buck at 1280 x 1024?

I want to be able to run games at max settings with all eye candy enabled with no lag.

I run windows XP so leave DX10 performance out of consideration.

What is the best deal going now?

Nvidia 9800GT at $119
-or-
ATI HD4850 at $169

Is the $50 increase really worth the extra fraps that the 4850 provides and would I even notice the difference running at 1280 x 1024?


I'd say that the extra $50 is worth it as you may decide to get a new monitor in the near future since the larger displays are getting much cheaper. You probably won't notice much of a difference between the two at 1280x1040, but the 4850 would be markedly faster if you stepped up to 1920x1200 with a new monitor.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 10:34:25 PM

Nah, I am staying at 1280 x 1024. I got an excellent monitor and it fits my desk perfect.
October 21, 2008 10:42:34 PM

In term of strict bang for the buck, 8800gt/9800gt is definitely better over 4850. Percentage price gap is much larger than percentage performance gap. It's not a matter of "probably" but "definitely."
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4850/26....

But hey, why be a penny-pincher? It takes the fun out of shopping. :p 
October 21, 2008 10:52:45 PM

go for the 4850, the cards from nvidia do not support dx10.1 like the ati cards and with farcry2 as well as some other games coming out that does its going to make nvidia's cards look pale in comparison to ati
October 21, 2008 10:54:31 PM

rwayne said:
What is the Best Bang for your Buck at 1280 x 1024?

I want to be able to run games at max settings with all eye candy enabled with no lag.


Which is it? Do you want the best bang for you buck? Or to be able to run games at max settings with all eye candy and no lag? (which games BTW)
You can't have you cake and eat it to, but you can eat some of the cake and have the rest.
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 10:56:33 PM

Everyone. Please reference my original post. Leave DX10 out of your decision making process. I am only going to be playing DX9 games.

Quote:
I run Windows XP so leave DX10 performance out of consideration.
October 21, 2008 10:56:47 PM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

EVGA 384-P3-N966-TR
GeForce 9600 GSO 384MB 192-bit
GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card

$50 after rebate - includes shipping

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

EVGA 512-P3-N860-TR
GeForce 9600 GT 512MB
256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card

$78 after rebate - includes shipping

I have the 8800 gs which is almost identical to the 9600 gso, I have a 19 inch 1440 x 900 and have no problems at all, everything on high
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:04:29 PM

Those are great deals and I know what the 9600GT offers but I want performance beyond that. A 9800GT is the least I am willing to accept performance wise.

I am interested to see what the opening prices for the ATI 4830s will be this week. From what I understand they will beat the 9800GT in most benchmarks.
October 21, 2008 11:05:47 PM

jamesl said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

EVGA 384-P3-N966-TR
GeForce 9600 GSO 384MB 192-bit
GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card

$50 after rebate - includes shipping

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

EVGA 512-P3-N860-TR
GeForce 9600 GT 512MB
256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card

$78 after rebate - includes shipping


That 9600gso, at $50 ar plus free shipping, is definitely the best bang for the buck.

As for dx10.1, ignore it. Assassin's Creed used to support it, but it was removed in a patch due to dx10.1 glitches that they're are too lazy to fix. Far Cry 2, which comes out today, if I remember correctly, supports it. There is nothing else. Dx10.1 does not add new effects, only improve performance with aa on. It does not shift the strict bang for the buck balance, not by a long shot.

On the higher end, there's the 3870x2, at $165 ar.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Despite being old, it still keep up with 4870, and supports 4 monitors.

Going further, there's 9800gx2 at $280, no rebates, or $220 ar.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Performance is above gtx280, second only to 4870x2.
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:10:29 PM

If you look around, youll find the 4850 for cheaper $. One thing to consider here is AA. Going with an old G8-9 card will hurt you there. The 4830s are coming out real soon, and Id wait, see what its price/performance is, and how it effects the 4850s pricing.
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:15:18 PM

When is the exact release date of the 4830?

I heard this week or next.
October 21, 2008 11:16:28 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
If you look around, youll find the 4850 for cheaper $. One thing to consider here is AA. Going with an old G8-9 card will hurt you there. The 4830s are coming out real soon, and Id wait, see what its price/performance is, and how it effects the 4850s pricing.


Even at 1920x1200 and 4x aa, the difference is still around 15%. Look at the benchmark again. It's still not nearly enough to catch up to the price difference. Strict bang for the buck is all about crunching numbers. :p 
October 21, 2008 11:21:14 PM

well if you're really price conscious just go with the 8800gt. Honestly performance between 8800gt and 9800gt is very slim. The only physical difference they have is the die shirnk. If you don't care about DX 10 then 8800GT is already preparing you for the future (if you ever change your mind) while giving you good performance.

I'm on a 8800gt right now with 22" monitor (1680x1050 res) and I can play TF2 maxed out on XP SP3 (AA, MSAA turned to max) with an average of 80fps a high of 110 and a low of 60 fps on a full 32 player server

Performance wise, there's no doubt ATI 4850 will outperform 8800gt (so 9800gt is out of the question). It really depends how much you are willing to pay. The performance difference is about 20% more than 9800gt.
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:23:40 PM

So, dagger, your link shows 4850 using 4xAA or even 8xAA? At 12x10?
October 21, 2008 11:27:20 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
So, dagger, your link shows 4850 using 4xAA or even 8xAA? At 12x10?


No 8xaa, only 4xaa. :p 

Still, even then, it's unlikely the performance gap will reach the 40% required to tip the balance. Value decreases as you go higher than mainstream, same as everything else.
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:43:10 PM

Firstly, currently, the 4850 is priced up around 20$ higher than just recently. Ive seen it as low as 139$, so like I said, I think its prerelease price gouging by the retailers before the 4830 release. Also, we dont know what the price performance of the 4830 is going to be, and this card could and already is a major player at this price point, as seen by the elavated 4850 prices.

Now, as for your link, youd better look again, as in each bench done at 12x10, theyre using ONLY 2zAA at that res, and is why I disregard all these benches at that res, because its pointless, at 12x10 to use ONLY 2xAA. In the LEAST demanding res, theyve decided to use such a small amount of AA is beyond me, and is a disservice to the abilities of the 4850, and shows nVidia in a better light at this res
a b U Graphics card
October 21, 2008 11:57:18 PM

Rwayne, wait until after the release of the 4830, see if its price/perf is good for you. My main point here is this. As this new card comes out, it seems the 4850s price has been elavated by 20$ or so, to leave a higher intro price for the 4830. Both of these cards will come down in price soon, even the unreleased 4830, so, like I said, Id wait a lil longer for now
October 22, 2008 12:03:51 AM

dagger said:
Even at 1920x1200 and 4x aa, the difference is still around 15%. Look at the benchmark again. It's still not nearly enough to catch up to the price difference. Strict bang for the buck is all about crunching numbers. :p 


JAYDEEJOHN said:
Firstly, currently, the 4850 is priced up around 20$ higher than just recently. Ive seen it as low as 139$, so like I said, I think its prerelease price gouging by the retailers before the 4830 release. Also, we dont know what the price performance of the 4830 is going to be, and this card could and already is a major player at this price point, as seen by the elavated 4850 prices.

Now, as for your link, youd better look again, as in each bench done at 12x10, theyre using ONLY 2zAA at that res, and is why I disregard all these benches at that res, because its pointless, at 12x10 to use ONLY 2xAA. In the LEAST demanding res, theyve decided to use such a small amount of AA is beyond me, and is a disservice to the abilities of the 4850, and shows nVidia in a better light at this res


Actually, at the high resolution I mentioned, it is 4xAA. The performance difference lessens as resolution and AA decreases, naturally.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4850/26....

And where did you get 4850 for $139.99($140)? That would be some good deal. The lowest on Newegg was $160.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Compared to lowest 9800gt, at $120.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a b U Graphics card
October 22, 2008 12:14:23 AM

dagger said:
In term of strict bang for the buck, 8800gt/9800gt is definitely better over 4850. Percentage price gap is much larger than percentage performance gap. It's not a matter of "probably" but "definitely."
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4850/26....

But hey, why be a penny-pincher? It takes the fun out of shopping. :p 

Umm, lessee, where has the OP wanted, mentioned or hinted at any other res? And knowing that, youre talking about difference res anyways?, And thats why you posted your quote above? Im responding to the OP, as I thought you were, I guess not.

Now, whats so hard to understand what I just typed about the 4830? And if youve followed the pricing of the 4850, yes its been that low in price many a time before now, and the ONLY reason its priced as high as it is now is to allow wiggle room for the 4830, which will come in at a higher intro price, and then BOTH cards will settle back in price. Get it?
October 22, 2008 12:28:28 AM

You're beating a dead horse. 9800gt/8800gt has better bang for the buck, while 4850 perform better. I know you like ATI, but you don't have to make it look like they have it all, you know. :sarcastic: 

4850 is a very good card in its own right, it just don't offer the best bang for the buck. No need to get all defensive. :p 
a b U Graphics card
October 22, 2008 12:34:33 AM

Well, as Ive already said, wait til the 4830s come, then after a few weeks, we can rediscuss this. Also, I was just correcting you in the vein of this post, as it isnt what th OP was asking for. That knowledge/concerns applies to a different thread
October 22, 2008 2:42:46 AM

compare them when farcry 2 comes out the gap is only going to get bigger
i would say with all the other stuff the 4850's got, it offers the best bang for ur buck
October 22, 2008 4:09:25 AM

rangers said:
compare them when farcry 2 comes out the gap is only going to get bigger
i would say with all the other stuff the 4850's got, it offers the best bang for ur buck


True, but the OP has already said multiple times that he is running XP and therefore is only concerned about DX9 performance so the boost from DX10.1 in newer games is somewhat irrelevant in this case.

Quote:
Nah, I am staying at 1280 x 1024. I got an excellent monitor and it fits my desk perfect.


Fair enough. I currently have an 1280x1024 monitor as well but I've been itching to step up to a 1920x1200. The 1280x1024 has served me well for a few years, but I decided that I really want to be able to play HD video at 1080 resolutions and that isn't possible with the smaller monitor.

a b U Graphics card
October 24, 2008 2:14:57 AM

Well, the 4830 came out today. It looks pretty good. Newegg has them going for $129, most with $10 rebates.

I think this should push the 9800GTs down in price this week or next.

Fudzilla wrote an article about the HD4830s.

The title of the Article is "HD 4830 wipes the floor with 9800 GT".

Yet most of their benchmarks at lower resolution settings shows the 9800GT flat out beating the 4830 and in a lot of cases even the 4850.

However at the higher resolutions it shows the 4830 and 4850s separating themselves from the 9800GT by a good margin.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

I think this decides it for me. Why pay more for a 4850 when the 9800GT out performs it at 1280 x 1024 and is about $50 - $60 cheaper?
a b U Graphics card
October 24, 2008 2:46:51 AM

No, theres some that were released ONLY to sites BEFORE they changed their minds and went with 640 shaders. The 560 was only a few cards, again, deception by ATI, confusing the green team. Id wait to see how these cards turn out (4830) as theyll drop in price, and Im hearing they oc like crazy, easily getting better perf than a 4850
a b U Graphics card
October 24, 2008 3:01:59 AM

Yeah, PCGamesHardWare also got 1 with 560, man ATI loves to play with nVidia
October 24, 2008 3:04:23 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Yeah, PCGamesHardWare also got 1 with 560, man ATI loves to play with nVidia


I doubt that. It's not in their interest to mess up initial benchmarks, as that's what most of the masses look at. They don't look in detail. Some ATI employees probably just made a mistake. :p 
October 24, 2008 3:29:05 AM

dagger said:
That 9600gso, at $50 ar plus free shipping, is definitely the best bang for the buck.

As for dx10.1, ignore it. Assassin's Creed used to support it, but it was removed in a patch due to dx10.1 glitches that they're are too lazy to fix. Far Cry 2, which comes out today, if I remember correctly, supports it. There is nothing else. Dx10.1 does not add new effects, only improve performance with aa on. It does not shift the strict bang for the buck balance, not by a long shot.

On the higher end, there's the 3870x2, at $165 ar.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Despite being old, it still keep up with 4870, and supports 4 monitors.

Going further, there's 9800gx2 at $280, no rebates, or $220 ar.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Performance is above gtx280, second only to 4870x2.



you never never recommend ATI its all a bit fanboyish if you ask me. there was no glitch with dx10.1 in assassins creed, nvidia did the dirty with that game. With all the dx10.1 games coming out you would have to be stupid or a fanboy/girl to recommend nvidia just now.

who gives a **** about bang for ur buck when DX10.1 games mean more than saving a couple of bucks
a b U Graphics card
October 24, 2008 3:35:20 AM

Within the next year, the majority of games will support DX10.1 . It is something to look for at this point
October 24, 2008 9:01:04 AM

I would go with 9800gt at 1280x1024. Easily does that resolution and then some.
October 24, 2008 12:20:04 PM

rangers said:
you never never recommend ATI its all a bit fanboyish if you ask me. there was no glitch with dx10.1 in assassins creed, nvidia did the dirty with that game. With all the dx10.1 games coming out you would have to be stupid or a fanboy/girl to recommend nvidia just now.

who gives a **** about bang for ur buck when DX10.1 games mean more than saving a couple of bucks


The bug is real and it's there. While obviously they should have done the right thing and fixed it instead of the lazy thing and just drop support, saying the glitch does not exist is telling a white lie in the face of hard facts.

As for dx10.1 games coming out, other than Far Cry 2, there aren't any. And it's a console port that didn't actually live up to the hype. A lot of disappointed people out there.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/100505-13-disappointe...
Besides, studios of incoming blockbuster titles like Starcraft 2 and Fallout 3 have gone out of their way to specifically confirm that they will not support dx10.1 in those games. Let's face it, it's been almost a year, and two games picked up dx10.1, one of the two dropped it, major incoming titles will not support it, dx11 is on its way... It doesn't look good for dx10.1.

Also, the last time I checked, the 3870x2 that I recommended is ATI. It supports 10.1, which is, while not useful, certainly doesn't harm its value at the $165 price tag. :p 
a b U Graphics card
October 24, 2008 12:30:42 PM

9800GX2. Even Crysis with everything on (no AA) is doable at thas res with this card.
!