Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

XFX 1024Mb nVidia GeForce 9400 GT PCI-Express VGA Card

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
March 5, 2009 12:16:29 PM

Yes. It does n`t need an external power lead, you should be fine.
March 5, 2009 12:55:26 PM

What do you think about the card? i am upgrading from Gigabyte Nvidia 9400 GT 512 Mb to XFX 1024Mb nVidia GeForce 9400 GT PCI-Express VGA Card do you think its a good choice. The reason i am changing is becuase games like Crysis and Crysis warhead runs with lagging and its just get slow with medium setting. thanks for your help.
Related resources
March 5, 2009 1:05:13 PM

It won't make any difference...if you wanna play Crysis, get 9800GTX+ or higher...
For low range playing, 9600GT will do(with the 350W PSU)...
March 5, 2009 1:40:47 PM

Would 9800 GTX+ will run ok with 350 watts PSU
March 5, 2009 1:55:14 PM

No it wont you will have to upgrade your power supply.
a c 186 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
March 5, 2009 2:04:24 PM

No. You`ll need about 450W from a good manufacturer like Corsair, OCZ Seasonic or PC Power and Cooling or 550W from a cheaper brand, either way, look at the specs for the 12v output, it`ll need to be either 2x17 Amps or about 30 Amps on a single rail but the higher the better.
March 5, 2009 2:41:03 PM

coozie7 said:
No. You`ll need about 450W from a good manufacturer like Corsair, OCZ Seasonic or PC Power and Cooling or 550W from a cheaper brand, either way, look at the specs for the 12v output, it`ll need to be either 2x17 Amps or about 30 Amps on a single rail but the higher the better.



thanks man, one more thing the 9800 GTX+ has got 512 Mb and XFX 1024Mb nVidia GeForce 9400 GT PCI-Express VGA Card has got 1GB, still you recommended 9800. i am new at this so i would appreciate if you could explain in a little detail. Many thank
March 5, 2009 2:50:30 PM

9800GTX+ 512MB would be far far better than even a 9400GT 2GB..
March 5, 2009 2:53:36 PM

9600GT 512MB would also be much better than a 9400GT..
9400GT 512< 9400GT 1GB< 9500GT 512< 9600GT 512< etc.
a b U Graphics card
March 5, 2009 8:44:49 PM

The 1GB for the 9400GT is pointless because the 9400 is far too weak to use even 256 megabytes of video memory.

The 9400GT is a low end video card strapped with high memory to sucker people into buying them.

March 5, 2009 8:53:31 PM

rehan1974 said:
What do you think about the card? i am upgrading from Gigabyte Nvidia 9400 GT 512 Mb to XFX 1024Mb nVidia GeForce 9400 GT PCI-Express VGA Card do you think its a good choice. The reason i am changing is becuase games like Crysis and Crysis warhead runs with lagging and its just get slow with medium setting. thanks for your help.


9400GT to 9400GT is not an upgrade.
March 5, 2009 11:09:18 PM

theAnimal said:
9400GT to 9400GT is not an upgrade.


i know but my original 9400GT just have 512MB and the new one has got !GB so i guess its upgrade in that sense.
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2009 3:46:27 AM

Not to bash, because we all start learning somewhere and don't know everything, I didn't. But the extra memory is good for higher resolution, but the only bad thing about more memory on the 9400gt is that the 9400 gt has such a weak architecture and processor, the 9400gt would not be able to perform well enough at higher resolutions to even make use of the extra memory. If you can, return it. It's not that the 9400gt may be a bad card, it's probably great for someone wanting to do home theater, but for games, avoid the 9400gt and even 9500gt at all costs. The differences are the 9800 series cards have a far better architecture and faster processors. Even with less memory they would smash a 9400gt or even a 9500gt.

Another card to check out, look at the ATI 4670. You should not have to upgrade the power supply, and it should run almost as well as a 9600gt. Which would be a much much better card than the 9400gt.
March 6, 2009 4:20:10 AM

4670 is suppose to rival the 9500gt but its killing every last one of them its even giving the 9600gt a run for its money and beats it at games which favour ATi so get it at all cost you wont be disappointed.
March 6, 2009 8:43:04 AM

Guys i truley appreciate you help and thanks for all the support. I am not a pro gamer but love games. I am puuting down my system's spec, feel free to comment as i would need to know what i ahve done wrong. My Pc is custom built. Specs are:

Foxconn P35AX-S motherboard
Intel Quad core
4 GB RAM
21" TFT Panasonic Flat screen
750 GB HD Drive
4xDVD writemaster
Gigabyte Nvidia 9400 GT 512MB Graphics card

I know its not one the top notch system but works pretty well for me apart from the 9400 GT which i am looking to upgrade.

One more issue is that windows is reading my RAM as 3GB but i know that i have got Kingston DDR2x2= 4GB RAM. Please respond.
March 6, 2009 8:52:45 AM

What make should i get for ATI 4670

Gigibyte, HIS, Palit, Saphire?

I am also told that i shouldn't go for an overclocked card as it increases the risk of the burning out or during gameplay unpredictable behavior. Please advise. thanks
March 6, 2009 9:27:15 AM

This is a common mistake made by people new to gaming and graphics manufacturers know that people will nearly always buy the card with more VRAM, assuming it is a faster card.

With nvidia the way to make sense of the nomenclature is this:

7xxx, 8xxx and 9xxx refers to the generation of card, with the 7xxx series being older than the 8xxx series and so on.

The second number refers to what the card is intended to do: an x400 would be a low end card, along with x500. x600 is really the minimum you'd want to game with. x800 are desigined for gaming - so if you want performance, their your best bet. Therefore 8400<8500<8600<<8800.

Just to make things more difficult you'll see a suffix on the end such as gs, gso, gt, gtx or gx2. With this gs<gso<gt<gtx. Gx2 refers to a card with 2 GPU's on one board - a twin graphics card, although these are less common.

The gs and gso are reserved for lower end cards. Gt - slightly better, and gtx - big money, big performance. VRAM isn't the last word in performance either, the number of stream processors, memory type (ddr2, ddr3) and clock speeds have a huge say in the performance of the card. This is the main difference between the x400, x500, x600 and x800 cards.

So, 8400gs < 8400gt. Likewise 8800gso < 8800gt.

Nvidia also have a new range of cards (the 200 series) which use a different naming system. The cards available are the GTX260, GTX 285 and GTX295. You can already tell that these cards are meant for gaming due to the 'GTX' prefix. And obviously the 260<285<295. These cards are pretty serious money however. (nvidia are also releasing at GT250 and Gt1XX cards soon, but don't worry about these)

ATI use a slightly different system.

3xxx and 4xxx refers to the generation. The second and third number refers to the cards performance, with the x8xx being the high performance range. x6xx is good for light gaming and x5xx or lower should really be restricted to desktop use.

So, using the 4xxx series as an example; 4870 would refer to a 4xxx series card (the most recent), the x8xx denotes the card is desigined for gaming, and the xx70 refers to the speed of the RAM the card has, with xx70 cards having faster RAM than the xx50 versions. The first and second numbers are the most important here.

For ATI: 4350<4550<4650<4670<<4850<4870. There is aslo the twin GPU 4870X2, although this is very expensive, and very high performing.

Likewise with nvidia, the most important this is the card series and desigined application - NOT vram. A 1Gb 4670 will be left in the dust by a 512mb 4870. Even a 2gb 4670 wouldn't stand a chance.

When comparing ATI to nvidia (generally):

HD4650 - 4670 = 8600 range, 9600 range.
HD4850 - 4870 = 9800 - GTX200

Hopes this makes things clearer.

Your copy of windows is most likely 32bit if you can only see 3Gb of ram. This is a limitation of the operating system. 32bit OS's can only recognise a total of 4gb system ram, but since you have a 512mb graphics card some of the availavle system ram is being 'used' up by it. The fix is to upgrade to a 64bit version of the OS you are using. 64bit OS's can recognise up to 128Gb of ram, although most motherboards max out between 16 and 24gb.

Overclocking is not that risky, as long as you are sensible with your tweaks. And can gain large performance increases. Your Q6600's (guess!) stock speed will be 2.4Ghz, but it can easily be overclocked to give clock speeds in excess of 3.6Ghz with decent cooling. Thats a huge performance increase considering the Q9650 (quad 3.0Ghz) costs about £300. I run my cpu, memory and graphics card all overclocked 24/7 and have never had any problems.

The ATI 4670 is IMO the best budget gamer card, however if you can stretch a bit the 9800GTX+ or the ATI HD 4850 are also very nice.










March 6, 2009 9:28:18 AM

It seems like its overclocked and i am not too keen on overclocked cards. Also on

http://www.tekshop247.com/shopping_cart.php

(GV R467D3-512I) Gigabyte GV-R467D3-512I Radeon HD 4670 512MB ATX DVI-I Graphics Card is for £71.55

Which shall i go for, Generics or Gigabyte? thanks

March 6, 2009 9:53:12 AM

emyyhh said:
This is a common mistake made by people new to gaming and graphics manufacturers know that people will nearly always buy the card with more VRAM, assuming it is a faster card.

With nvidia the way to make sense of the nomenclature is this:

7xxx, 8xxx and 9xxx refers to the generation of card, with the 7xxx series being older than the 8xxx series and so on.

The second number refers to what the card is intended to do: an x400 would be a low end card, along with x500. x600 is really the minimum you'd want to game with. x800 are desigined for gaming - so if you want performance, their your best bet. Therefore 8400<8500<8600<<8800.

Just to make things more difficult you'll see a suffix on the end such as gs, gso, gt, gtx or gx2. With this gs<gso<gt<gtx. Gx2 refers to a card with 2 GPU's on one board - a twin graphics card, although these are less common.

The gs and gso are reserved for lower end cards. Gt - slightly better, and gtx - big money, big performance. VRAM isn't the last word in performance either, the number of stream processors, memory type (ddr2, ddr3) and clock speeds have a huge say in the performance of the card. This is the main difference between the x400, x500, x600 and x800 cards.

So, 8400gs < 8400gt. Likewise 8800gso < 8800gt.

Nvidia also have a new range of cards (the 200 series) which use a different naming system. The cards available are the GTX260, GTX 285 and GTX295. You can already tell that these cards are meant for gaming due to the 'GTX' prefix. And obviously the 260<285<295. These cards are pretty serious money however. (nvidia are also releasing at GT250 and Gt1XX cards soon, but don't worry about these)

ATI use a slightly different system.

3xxx and 4xxx refers to the generation. The second and third number refers to the cards performance, with the x8xx being the high performance range. x6xx is good for light gaming and x5xx or lower should really be restricted to desktop use.

So, using the 4xxx series as an example; 4870 would refer to a 4xxx series card (the most recent), the x8xx denotes the card is desigined for gaming, and the xx70 refers to the speed of the RAM the card has, with xx70 cards having faster RAM than the xx50 versions. The first and second numbers are the most important here.

For ATI: 4350<4550<4650<4670<<4850<4870. There is aslo the twin GPU 4870X2, although this is very expensive, and very high performing.

Likewise with nvidia, the most important this is the card series and desigined application - NOT vram. A 1Gb 4670 will be left in the dust by a 512mb 4870. Even a 2gb 4670 wouldn't stand a chance.

When comparing ATI to nvidia (generally):

HD4650 - 4670 = 8600 range, 9600 range.
HD4850 - 4870 = 9800 - GTX200

Hopes this makes things clearer.

Your copy of windows is most likely 32bit if you can only see 3Gb of ram. This is a limitation of the operating system. 32bit OS's can only recognise a total of 4gb system ram, but since you have a 512mb graphics card some of the availavle system ram is being 'used' up by it. The fix is to upgrade to a 64bit version of the OS you are using. 64bit OS's can recognise up to 128Gb of ram, although most motherboards max out between 16 and 24gb.

Overclocking is not that risky, as long as you are sensible with your tweaks. And can gain large performance increases. Your Q6600's (guess!) stock speed will be 2.4Ghz, but it can easily be overclocked to give clock speeds in excess of 3.6Ghz with decent cooling. Thats a huge performance increase considering the Q9650 (quad 3.0Ghz) costs about £300. I run my cpu, memory and graphics card all overclocked 24/7 and have never had any problems.

The ATI 4670 is IMO the best budget gamer card, however if you can stretch a bit the 9800GTX+ or the ATI HD 4850 are also very nice.



Thanks for that it all doesn't make sense as me bieng new to this but nonetheless its very detailed. thank you. How can i find out that my OS is 32 bit. I don't think i would go for ATI 4670 as my PSU is only 350 watts.

If i need to upgrade it to a 64 bit OS does that mean i have to get a 64 bit windows OS new software i suppose?
March 6, 2009 10:10:03 AM

To see the verision of windows you are running (assuming its vista):

Click the start icon.
Go to the control panel
System and maintanance
System (its just under the windows experience score)

If you have 32bit vista (which you most likely will) then you'd need to get hold of a 64bit version of vista, should you wish to upgrade. I think it can be obatined as an upgrade cd at a reduced cost mind (not 100% sure though)

In my opinion there is no point is buying a card lesser than the 4670, as you simply wont see the difference. Your best bet (unfortunately) is to upgrade both your powersupply and your graphics card -but i understand thats extra money. A good quality 500W PSU would be enough - corsair, enermax, pc power and cooling and be quiet! all make good PSU's, to name a few.

If your buying a card that factory overclocked then you have peace of mind as it'll ship with a warranty.

(edited for terrible spelling)
a b U Graphics card
March 7, 2009 6:35:39 AM

Though if you have a decent 350 watt power supply, it should be ok, as the 4670 is made for low power situations.

Also, on brand, can't say much about Gigabyte for video cards, but I've got a Gigabyte motherboard I'm pretty happy with.
March 9, 2009 10:16:29 AM

ohiou_grad_06 said:
Though if you have a decent 350 watt power supply, it should be ok, as the 4670 is made for low power situations.

Also, on brand, can't say much about Gigabyte for video cards, but I've got a Gigabyte motherboard I'm pretty happy with.



Thanks. I have ordered a 4670 and will be getting it soon. Power supply is good qulality 350 Watts so like i have been told that it should be fine. Will give you all the feedback after installing the new card. Thanks guys for your help. Will stay in touch.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 171 Î Nvidia
January 1, 2011 11:32:13 AM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!