Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New video card

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
February 21, 2009 4:28:47 AM

Hey, just thought I'd look for some advice;

Built a new PC a couple of weeks ago, and bought a BFG 9500GT 1gb card.

Rest of PC specs are
AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+ (3.185 Ghz)
2gb ram (other stick died... wtf)

So, thinking I might have to upgrade my GPU AGAIN, as Empire: Total War is coming out soon.

Not looking to spend a fortue, $150 or less would be a Godsend.

Or should I keep the 9500?

Resolution-- 1024 x 768

More about : video card

a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 1:36:54 PM

The 9500 is a terribly weak gaming card. 1 gig of memory on it is useless. This is truley a slick marketing technique to sell a low-end gaming card.
For under $120, I would cast my vote for a 4830. And you do not need to pay a premium for a gig of memory. 512 meg is more than cards at this level, and double, double especially the res you run at, will ever need.
a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 3:31:20 PM

Or even check out a 4670 if short on cash. Get rid of the 9500. I have a 9600gt with an Athlon x2 5200+ and 2 gb of ram, and it's running most things I have quite happily.
Related resources
February 21, 2009 3:40:20 PM

Thanks for the info.

What specs should I primarily look for in a card?
a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 3:51:34 PM

For $150 or less, I suggest you get a 4850 or 9800GTX/GTX+
Those are the best cards for your money.

As for specs, it used to be clock speeds, but now it really doesn't matter since clock speeds have gone down and other specs have gone up. Just look at the GPU's gaming benchmarks from various websites to see its performance.
a c 177 U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 3:54:46 PM

If you do n`t intend to upgrade the monitor in the near future a 4670 will be fine.

If you do intend to upgrade the monitor, maybe you should push that budget now and go for a HD4850, saving you the need to stup up for both later, because the 4670 will start to struggle if you go to 20+" and 16x10.
a c 177 U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 3:58:34 PM

As Bluescreen says, its really down to benchmarks rather than memory/core speeds or number of shaders, each company has their own architecture and they cannot really be compared so simply.

BTW `stup` should have been `stump`.

And I like this sites benchmark tables;
a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 4:11:36 PM

The specs can sometimes be misleading. The GTX260 for example, has significantly better specs than the 9800GTX on paper - 2x more transistors, 50% more memory, almost 2x more memory bus, 50%-80% more shader units, etc

However, in actual benchmarks, the GTX260 performances only around 15%-20% better.
February 21, 2009 6:39:36 PM

Does your motherboard support 2 GPU's(2 x PCIe-16)? Then keep the 9500GT as a PhysX processor and get another GPU for the rest of work. For 1024x768 9800GT would be enough. HD4830 is known to be 9800GT killer card. I'm not sure about that.
a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2009 11:13:04 PM

linussbugg said:
How about the 9800GT 1gb?

Going for pretty cheap at Best Buy right now (heh.. BestBuy and cheap don't usually go together)

That really is not cheap at all. A 9800GT at newegg goes for around $100, or $40 cheaper than that bestbuy offer. And a 9800GT won't come close to using 1GB of RAM (considering a 9800GTX only has 512mb, and a GTX260 has approx 900mb of RAM, and both are much better than the 9800GT)

Get it from newegg or get a 4830