9600 GT vs 4650

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

molnir

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2010
3
0
18,510
I need some help.

I'm currently using a GeForce 9600 GT Superclocked (EVGA Part No. 512-P3-N862-AR) that I purchased back in 2008. Here are its specs:
675 MHz GPU
64 Stream Processors
512 MB DDR3
256 bit bus
1.8 GHz memory speed



I have the opportunity to replace it with a Radeon 4650 (Biostar Part No. VA4653NH51-B), with the following specs:
600 MHz GPU
320 Stream Processors
512 MB DDR3
128 bit bus
1.8 GHz memory speed

The older 9600 trumps the 4650 on both GPU speed and bus width, but is that offset by the large increase in stream processors? In other words, am I better off with the older card or the newer card?

My rig isn't used to do anything but surf the web and play World of Warcraft.
 
Solution
M
You're much better off with the 9600GT. You can't really count the stream processors the same way as those on the 9600GT since the architecture is so different. Shaders on the 4650 operate in groups of 5 that are dependent on each other, so how many of them are used depends alot on how the shader code is optimized. At worst, a shader can be done in such a way that only one of the 5 in a group is utilized meaning the 4650 is effectively using 64 shaders though each shader can still do two instructions per clock. As for clock rates the 9600GT has a separate clock for the shaders which is much higher than the core clock.
Sort by date Sort by votes
M

megamanx00

Splendid
Sep 3, 2008
8,216
2
31,465
You're much better off with the 9600GT. You can't really count the stream processors the same way as those on the 9600GT since the architecture is so different. Shaders on the 4650 operate in groups of 5 that are dependent on each other, so how many of them are used depends alot on how the shader code is optimized. At worst, a shader can be done in such a way that only one of the 5 in a group is utilized meaning the 4650 is effectively using 64 shaders though each shader can still do two instructions per clock. As for clock rates the 9600GT has a separate clock for the shaders which is much higher than the core clock.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
jyjjy

jyjjy

Splendid
Feb 27, 2006
9,877
1
31,960

Eh, it's a perfectly fine card for low resolution gaming. It's on par both in performance and price with the newer 9800GTs.
The current deals on the HD4850 certainly make it a better buy but a lot of systems don't have a PSU capable of handling that card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jyjjy

jyjjy

Splendid
Feb 27, 2006
9,877
1
31,960
More than 512mb of memory on a card of that caliber is a marketing gimmick and nothing more. Why are you asking for one?
Your 99% number is laughably incorrect. I'd be quite surprised if even the average computer has a PSU that can handle a GTS 250.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
builderbobftw

builderbobftw

Splendid
Feb 6, 2010
3,601
0
22,810


Lol, you need 1gb of ram to play with either AA, or a decent res.

marketing gimmick my ass.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jyjjy

jyjjy

Splendid
Feb 27, 2006
9,877
1
31,960
Are you kidding me?
What do you think that article is supposed to prove?
Your knowledge is clearly limited, statements often flat out untrue, your attitude unnecessary and your arguments are only tenuously related to the previous statements.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
builderbobftw

builderbobftw

Splendid
Feb 6, 2010
3,601
0
22,810
Slightly???

Massive diffrence!

Just proving you wrong, yet again.

And the GTS 250 is close (75% ish) to the 4870, and gains from having 1gb of memory.

But the 5670 is more like 1 quarter as powerfull as the 4870....(LOL PROVING MY POINT AGAIN ARN"T you?)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom