Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Are the GTS 450's Game worthy

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 13, 2010 4:11:55 PM

Hey guys,

Do you think that the GTS450's are game worthy? I consider myself a budget gamer but do enjoy the work the gaming industry delivers. Mid-tech savvy.

Reading the reviews on Amazon and Tiger Direct can get you to doubt the products. So I would love to hear from gamers who have experienced these cards.

Is it possible to sport a GTS450 and crank the games on max settings. For now lets just toggle between monitor resolution only.

Love to hear any comments on that.

Interests: RPG, RTS, Shooter and Adventure games.

More about : gts 450 game worthy

a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 4:38:12 PM

The GTS 450 is a gaming level graphics card so long as we're talking monitor resolutions of say... 1680x1050 or less. :)  Ultimately of course, this depends on exactly what game you're playing and whether you just must crank AA settings to max. As an example, Guru3d did a GTS 450 review here:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gts-450-review-ro...

For some games, like Bad Company 2 (in DX11 mode) the GTS 450 just wasn't enough horsepower. Now, if you ran the game in DX9 mode you'd probably fair decently. Now, for a game title like Call of Duty:Modern Warfare 2 the GTS 450 would work even up to 1920x1080.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gts-450-review-ro...

For the most modern games, at 1680x1050 I'd suggest a GTX 460 if you can afford it, as it'll perform quite a bit better. At resolutions of 1920x1080 I'd look at the ATI 6850/5850 or GTX 470. The GTS 450 is more of a budget gaming card. The GTX 460 is more of a mainstream card, and GTX 470 cards and better are more enthusiast level cards.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 7:21:13 PM

GTS450 is about equal to an HD5750. It'll play most every game 1680x1050 and below with a few 1920x1080 exceptions (on lower quality). Older games will be fine with it.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 7:37:24 PM

There are really two different GTS450s. Stock ones are similar to the 5750 or GTS250. Your ok to try at 1680x1050, but expect to turn details down on newer games. Then there are the OC'd models that are similar to the (stock) 5770. These ones will handle gaming better, but the demanding titles will still pose a problem at 1680x1050. (Crysis, Metro 2033, etc.)

As long as the price difference isn't to much, I'd consider the GTS450 OC'd models. If not, get one of the stock ones and OC it yourself. If the idea of OCing scares you, consider getting the 5770. Should be close in price to the GTS450.
m
0
l
a c 456 Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 7:47:15 PM

jerreece said:
That's the same review I already linked him to. :bounce: 

Great minds think alike, I guess, and some of us don't read through the posts very thoroughly it seems.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 7:53:45 PM

The GTX 460 768mb is a considerably better card for not too much more if you can afford $150.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 8:17:44 PM

they play games fine, just not maxed. If you have an sli capable motherboard you can always add another later to get gtx470 performance. If your only after a single card, the ati 5770 is about the same price and is faster. As already mentioned the gtx460 768 is faster, but for some reason i would be hesitant to buy a card with less than 1gb ram, as per my experience, im glad i bought the 640mb 8800gts over the 320mb when i did, as 320mb has not been enough for the past few years.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 13, 2010 9:46:12 PM

Though I normally agree with having 1GB of VRAM, in the OP's case with a lower res monitor, the GTX 460 768MB would likely do fine. Unless of course we talk GTA IV in particular, which has an affinity to large amounts of VRAM.

But as I said earlier, as did jyjjy, the GTX 460 is the best option for a price oriented gamer. Bang for buck performance has a good sweet spot at that level. And yes, the ATI 5770 is faster than a GTS 450. :) 
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 12:03:47 AM

jerreece said:
Though I normally agree with having 1GB of VRAM, in the OP's case with a lower res monitor, the GTX 460 768MB would likely do fine. Unless of course we talk GTA IV in particular, which has an affinity to large amounts of VRAM.

But as I said earlier, as did jyjjy, the GTX 460 is the best option for a price oriented gamer. Bang for buck performance has a good sweet spot at that level. And yes, the ATI 5770 is faster than a GTS 450. :) 


Well in a way you did under state just how much GTA IV can really use vram. It takes 2GB just to do 1920x1280 with max settings and even then the game is a cpu hog like no other. :whistle: 
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 12:07:04 AM

The GT450 will hold up like any G92 GTS/GTX on the low side and like a GTX 260 on the high end except that it uses less power. It is a ok card but don't expect to have all the eye candy at those ridiculous high res on a monitor the size of a king size bed. SLI is a decent option down the road but it should be how you start off. If you are able to save for a little longer unless you have no source of income then go with the GTS450 even though your best option is a GTX460. Again only go with the GTS450 if you have no income.
m
0
l
a c 456 Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 2:07:32 AM

Another option, if 1GB of VRAM is required is the GTX460 SE. It is a budget-priced cut down 460, but has the 1GB of memory and performs at about the rate of the 768MB model.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 2:17:33 AM

The SE is weaker than the 768mb card. It only exists to serve a market that cares more about stats than actual performance. People seem a bit crazy about ram to me to honest and I don't know why. Just look at the benchmarks. Even at high resolution the 768mb card kills a GTS 450. Another 256mb of ram just isn't that important.
m
0
l
December 14, 2010 10:05:22 AM

jerreece said:
The GTS 450 is a gaming level graphics card so long as we're talking monitor resolutions of say... 1680x1050 or less. :)  Ultimately of course, this depends on exactly what game you're playing and whether you just must crank AA settings to max. As an example, Guru3d did a GTS 450 review here:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gts-450-review-ro...

For some games, like Bad Company 2 (in DX11 mode) the GTS 450 just wasn't enough horsepower. Now, if you ran the game in DX9 mode you'd probably fair decently. Now, for a game title like Call of Duty:Modern Warfare 2 the GTS 450 would work even up to 1920x1080.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gts-450-review-ro...

For the most modern games, at 1680x1050 I'd suggest a GTX 460 if you can afford it, as it'll perform quite a bit better. At resolutions of 1920x1080 I'd look at the ATI 6850/5850 or GTX 470. The GTS 450 is more of a budget gaming card. The GTX 460 is more of a mainstream card, and GTX 470 cards and better are more enthusiast level cards.



Oh yeah, about utilizing DX9/10/11: how does one go about doing so. I always thought that the video card automatically enables its DX-mode depending on the games requirement. You are probably the second person I've notice who seems to indicate that the DX mode can/should be manually set. Do I understand this correctly?
m
0
l
December 14, 2010 10:10:29 AM

4745454b said:
There are really two different GTS450s. Stock ones are similar to the 5750 or GTS250. Your ok to try at 1680x1050, but expect to turn details down on newer games. Then there are the OC'd models that are similar to the (stock) 5770. These ones will handle gaming better, but the demanding titles will still pose a problem at 1680x1050. (Crysis, Metro 2033, etc.)

As long as the price difference isn't to much, I'd consider the GTS450 OC'd models. If not, get one of the stock ones and OC it yourself. If the idea of OCing scares you, consider getting the 5770. Should be close in price to the GTS450.


On that note, nothing suits me better than overclocking a card. I tried it once on my old XFX Geforce 8500 GT video card, which I still use. But you just can't get too much of a performance difference from OC'ing the old cards. Manufacturers are aware of the drive that gamers have to push hardware beyond limits, so my initial indication is that they made newer cards OC easy/durable which ensures significant increase in performance when OC'ed.
m
0
l
December 14, 2010 10:16:48 AM

jyjjy said:
The GTX 460 768mb is a considerably better card for not too much more if you can afford $150.



Not that the GTX460 isn't within my range, its just that the GTS450 is within grasp. After expenses I could purchase a GTS450 altogether, but for a GTX460 it would take me about 2 - 3 months savings to get the it. So the reason I inquire is to find out if after having purchased either cards they won't have to be replaced too soon. Of course the newer cards would relive me of this dilemma, but they are very expensive... for now :D 
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 10:21:24 AM

Don't worry about a factory OC then if you are alright with overclocking on your own. It's really pretty easy. What you want is a card with good cooling. The GTX 460 is a great overclocker. The reference speed is 675mhz and they can often get up to 900mhz.
As for the DX thing in general the games will choose the highest available level of DX with your specific OS and card. Sometimes the DX11 features(like tessellation) will be in the graphics options and you can turn them on or off. Other times a game might have multiple executable files for different DX levels.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 10:24:34 AM

ginmardo said:
Not that the GTX460 isn't within my range, its just that the GTS450 is within grasp. After expenses I could purchase a GTS450 altogether, but for a GTX460 it would take me about 2 - 3 months savings to get the it. So the reason I inquire is to find out if after having purchased either cards they won't have to be replaced too soon. Of course the newer cards would relive me of this dilemma, but they are very expensive... for now :D 

What is your monitor's native resolution exactly? If it is under 1080p then the GTS 450 will do very well, especially when OCed. If your monitor is 1080p the GTS 450 will still do fairly well but I would recommend saving up the money for the GTX 460. The difference is only about $30 last I checked.
m
0
l
December 14, 2010 10:35:31 AM

jyjjy said:
What is your monitor's native resolution exactly? If it is under 1080p then the GTS 450 will do very well, especially when OCed. If your monitor is 1080p the GTS 450 will still do fairly well but I would recommend saving up the money for the GTX 460. The difference is only about $30 last I checked.



I think my monitor is 1080p [resolution max 1920x1080]. Hmm, saving up for the GTX460 is doable if it will give me longer game play time than what I could have with a GTS450. I also play older games. I switch between old and new games, new games I want to play and older games I always wanted to play without the issue of lagging or a video card which does not comply. Trying to make up for lost play time haha.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 10:47:19 AM

Yeah, for LCDs it is best to use a monitor's native resolution(the highest.) It is the actual number of pixels the screen is made up of. You can lower it but it will cause some pixel distortion and image quality will suffer.
Like I said the GTS 450 will be pretty good for 1080p when given a nice high OC. You aren't going to be maxing out the settings on the more intensive current games but everything will be highly playable for now and a while to come. So if it is really going to take you a few extra months to cover the price difference to a GTX 460 768mb then the GTS 450 is a reasonable choice.
m
0
l
December 14, 2010 12:17:06 PM

jyjjy said:
Yeah, for LCDs it is best to use a monitor's native resolution(the highest.) It is the actual number of pixels the screen is made up of. You can lower it but it will cause some pixel distortion and image quality will suffer.
Like I said the GTS 450 will be pretty good for 1080p when given a nice high OC. You aren't going to be maxing out the settings on the more intensive current games but everything will be highly playable for now and a while to come. So if it is really going to take you a few extra months to cover the price difference to a GTX 460 768mb then the GTS 450 is a reasonable choice.



Seems like the best idea so far. This is the cheapest card I could find on Amazon for GTS450.
Link: http://www.amazon.com/PNY-1024MB-PCI-Express-Graphics-V...

This one would cost me around $157.40. Yeah, I am not a US resident/national but can purchase things online and have it send to my country Suriname [South America]. With the costs and commissions the price tag jumps from $109.49 to $157.40.

There are no ratings for this item but PNY looks pretty durable yes? And very low priced too.
m
0
l
a c 456 Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 4:00:04 PM

Sometimes, switching from DirectX 9 or 10 to DirectX 11 brings a boost in performance.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 4:59:11 PM

ginmardo said:
Oh yeah, about utilizing DX9/10/11: how does one go about doing so. I always thought that the video card automatically enables its DX-mode depending on the games requirement. You are probably the second person I've notice who seems to indicate that the DX mode can/should be manually set. Do I understand this correctly?


This is sometimes dependent on the game itself. Some games actually allow you to select DX9, DX10, or DX11 within the Graphics/Video Settings options in game. Sometimes this is listed under an "Advanced" option within the Video Settings in game as well. Often times, the game will automatically run at the highest available option. So if you have DX11 and a DX11 capable card, it may default to that for best image quality. This is something to look at when you load whatever game you want to play.

Also, reducing "Shadows" settings often helps performance a lot.

I play Bad Company 2 a lot, and you can manually set DX9 or DX10/11 mode within the game's video/graphic settings.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
December 14, 2010 5:19:03 PM

17seconds said:
Sometimes, switching from DirectX 9 or 10 to DirectX 11 brings a boost in performance.


This entirely depends on the game. :)  If it's a DX11 game that incorporates Tessellation, then you reduce overall performance (FPS). However, if they don't use a lot of tessellation, and are using DX11 primarily for some of the refinements and performance boosts, then yes you can improve things. Unfortunately, you can't really make a blanket statement about DX11 improving or reducing performance yet, because it entirely varies depending on the game title and settings. :sweat: 
m
0
l
!