Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Need Good Graphics Card for Cheap

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 20, 2011 10:06:03 PM

Hey,

I have a Gateway DX4820 Desktop. It has a Nvidia GeForce G210 graphics card, 8 GB DDR3 Ram, 2.6Ghz quad-core processor. I want to be able to play Everquest 2 on high settings. What Graphics card do I need? Is it possible to get a good card for only around $100? The only cards I see are $300+ I've tried playing on the card I have, and it is unplayable. Thanks for any help.
a b U Graphics card
May 20, 2011 10:24:25 PM

What is your resolution?
m
0
l
May 20, 2011 10:30:40 PM

In the price range and without knowing your power supply, the safe bet is the HD5670. It doesn't require an auxiliary power connector and I believe it has roughly 3.5x-4x the performance of your G210.

Your choice of screen resolution would be the deciding factor between getting the 512MB one for 65$ or the 1GB one for 75$.

I'm looking for benchmarks of that particular game right now, but I'm sure the HD5670 will do quite well!
m
0
l
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
May 20, 2011 10:31:57 PM

Yeah, we will need to know the PSU too.
m
0
l
May 20, 2011 10:56:14 PM

Oh gosh, I didn't realize how old EQ II was! Uh yeah...hahaha...the HD5670 is gonna TEAR through it like an ADHD kid through a swimming pool full of funoodles and vanilla pudding. We're talking close to if not over 100FPS.

Your G210 should actually run it...not sure what the issue is there. I do recall a nVidia driver bug in the 8800 series that made EQ II barf though. But that was long ago...

And in case you were wondering how much better the HD5670 is than the G210...

A link showing the GT210 getting 13.5 FPS on Far Cry 2 @1680x1050:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-220,2445...

A link showing the HD5670 getting 49.8 FPS on Far Cry 2 @ 1680x1050:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5550-rade...
m
0
l
May 20, 2011 11:02:06 PM

Actually in an older game like EQ II we could even use L4D as an example.
The G210 gets 13.3 FPS @ 1680x1050
The HD5670 gets 74.5 FPS @ 1680x1050

*crickets chirping*

:bounce:  DO IT! :bounce: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
May 21, 2011 1:49:07 AM

The hd5670 should suit him well then.
m
0
l
May 22, 2011 12:49:40 AM

I'm running on a 300W now but I'm looking to upgrade my power supply to 750w. The G210 is a garbage card IMO. It works for some things, but fails miserably at running EQII. Not on my computer right now, so can't tell resolution. I'm looking for a 1GB card, maybe 1.5GB card.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
May 22, 2011 1:34:10 AM

TK61951 said:
I'm running on a 300W now but I'm looking to upgrade my power supply to 750w. The G210 is a garbage card IMO. It works for some things, but fails miserably at running EQII. Not on my computer right now, so can't tell resolution. I'm looking for a 1GB card, maybe 1.5GB card.

1.5GB?! HOLY CRAP! That is a LOT of RAM on a card! That games is very old, and new games only max out 1gb RAM with res above 1080p, unless your running Metro 2033 of course. 1.5Gb is too much for you.
m
0
l
May 23, 2011 10:46:46 PM

I don't consider it an old game, considering they just put out a new expansion this past February. I was under the impression,

with new expansions, comes new content, as well as new graphic technologies. Making the game harder to run on the same ole'

GPU. Maybe I'm way off, I dunno. I was thinking 1.5GB card because I want to be able to tear through all of the loading screens

and what not in a matter of seconds. Plus, wouldn't me getting a 1.5GB card be a good investment for future PC games? My

friend that showed me the game was using a 1.5GB card, so wouldn't there be a visual difference between 1GB and 1.5GB?

Edit: Sorry, forgot to post my resolution. It's 1600 x 900
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
May 24, 2011 1:50:38 AM

TK61951 said:
I don't consider it an old game, considering they just put out a new expansion this past February. I was under the impression,

with new expansions, comes new content, as well as new graphic technologies. Making the game harder to run on the same ole'

GPU. Maybe I'm way off, I dunno. I was thinking 1.5GB card because I want to be able to tear through all of the loading screens

and what not in a matter of seconds. Plus, wouldn't me getting a 1.5GB card be a good investment for future PC games? My

friend that showed me the game was using a 1.5GB card, so wouldn't there be a visual difference between 1GB and 1.5GB?

Edit: Sorry, forgot to post my resolution. It's 1600 x 900

Nope, no visual difference between 1gb and 1.5gb. VRAM is not system RAM. You won't just tear through loading screens, you will juts have more vRAM for higher res, and settings. At your res, 1gb is more than enough except for metro 2033 which needs 1.5gb.
m
0
l
May 24, 2011 4:35:01 PM

Okay, I will get the HD 5770. I thought me getting a better graphics card will help speed up loading times. I already have 8 GB

system RAM, so outside of upgrading my graphics card, I don't see where I could upgrade my system to make the game run

faster.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
May 24, 2011 6:17:45 PM

TK61951 said:
Okay, I will get the HD 5770. I thought me getting a better graphics card will help speed up loading times. I already have 8 GB

system RAM, so outside of upgrading my graphics card, I don't see where I could upgrade my system to make the game run

faster.

SSD. Some people say SSDs make it feel like they are not even running the same machine it's so fast. They cost a lot though.
m
0
l
May 26, 2011 4:40:15 PM

What is SSD? Never heard of it.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
May 26, 2011 5:08:54 PM

TK61951 said:
What is SSD? Never heard of it.

It uses flash memory instead of physical memory, low noise, WAAAAY faster, low heat, low power, and less space. They cost a lot, but are VERY fast!
m
0
l
!