schumi_thelegend

Distinguished
Oct 27, 2006
49
0
18,530
Hi,

I just bought an XFX 4650 512mb for some casual gaming. Was disappointed as it did not run games at max settings at 1440x900. Now i'm thinking to upgrade to a higher card such as a GF 9800GT or (if it's worth it) a GF GTS250. I know the GTS 250 supports Physx but how much of a difference does that make???

Will it be wise to spend the extra $$ on the GTS 250 as compared to the 9800GT???
And will a notice a sharp increase in performance as compared to the 4650 at 14440x900??

My setup:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.8GHz) (I know its quite old!!!)
2GB RAM
Cooler Master 460W PSU with 36A +12V.
1TB HDD
 
Your PSU is a pretty good brand and should be fine for these cards.
And yeah, an HD5770 is good. It's also $50-60 dollars more expensive than the other cards.
I wouldn't worry about Phys-x. It's not used in that many games and when it has been used it doesn't really add too much.
 

corylulu

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2009
17
0
18,510
Check out ebay. People put video cards up there all the time (I buy a lot of graphics cards on ebay - very few have any issues at all)

But the Geforce 9800GT is a good card and the GTX250 is better...
I am a big Nvidia fan myself, but if you are on THAT much of a budget... look into some ATI boards...

If you are willing to fork out extra moneys.... definitely go with the GTX 275/285.
 
Performance at x resolution is BS - doom 3 will run at a high res at max on any card these days yet newer games wont as a great example so why are people always asking what card is best at x res? 100% BS

Get the best card you can get at your budget - its the only way.

If you can afford to get a 5970 get it, otherwise go for something cheaper etc - its that simple.
 
Doom 3 came out over 5 years ago... What does it have to do with anything? It can safely be assumed that most people aren't looking to buy a card these days to play Doom 3. Just look at the OP. I'm sure it's little consolation to the guy that the HD4650 he purchased can play Half Life 2 beautifully at his resolution. Similarly in a few years now no one will care if a $50 card can play GTA IV or MW2 maxed out at high resolutions. They will care about if a GTS 450(which is really just a renamed GTX 385 :p ) can handle Bioshock 3 or Resident Evil 7.
To run games at higher resolutions you need a more powerful card. It's simple, higher resolutions = more pixels = more graphical power required. There's no BS involved. I'm not exactly sure what you don't understand but that you needed to bring up a 5 year old game no one plays any more to make a point should give you pause.
 

schumi_thelegend

Distinguished
Oct 27, 2006
49
0
18,530
Ok thanks alot everyone for the invaluable advice. Will go for the GTS 250 after all. I know ATI cards offer more bang for the buck at this price range but personally, I like Nvidia hardware.

Once again THANKS!!!
 

pwndeta

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2009
16
0
18,510


I'm going to agree, overclocking the CPU should help considerably and that 6300 should have a lot of headroom. I run a 2180 at 3.0ghz with a 4850 and I get very good framerates on all the games I play. (Wow, MW2, L4D2)