Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Help me choose graphics card between 5000 to 6000 rupees

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 3, 2012 6:57:54 AM

I want to buy graphics card between 5000 to 6000 indian rupees.But does not have any knowledge, Can anyone help me,
Here is my pc specs
17" monitor with 1024*768 resolution,
Windows 7 ultimate,
Motherboard-Asus P5GC-MX
PCIE 1.0 x16
Processor-Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2140 @ 1.60GHz 1.60GHz
Power Supply- 450w
RAM- 2gb DDR2

I want a good graphics card to play all latest games.
So Help to choose one.
Thanks in advance.
September 3, 2012 7:26:43 AM

with your budget, i can suggest you sapphire radeon HD 6670 1GB DDR5 but ur PC is quiet old model and ur CPU is very very basic model with just 1.6 Ghz.. all the now-a-day games are highly demanding games and you cant play much games with this config. u can check that urself in systemrequirementlabs
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 3, 2012 9:27:25 AM

No graphics card upgrade will fix your low end CPU and low memory capacity. I recommend saving your money and buying a whole new computer later. Upgrading very old machines is often like throwing your money away.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 4, 2012 5:30:19 AM

aneeshkumar said:
with your budget, i can suggest you sapphire radeon HD 6670 1GB DDR5 but ur PC is quiet old model and ur CPU is very very basic model with just 1.6 Ghz.. all the now-a-day games are highly demanding games and you cant play much games with this config. u can check that urself in systemrequirementlabs


Thanks for the reply,
Yes I have that kind of cpu. But I have a question that It is dual core
then I thought I can equal to the cpu of 3.2GHz , Thats my opinion , because It is 1.6GHz 1.6GHz , So I thought It is 3.2GHz,

Please clear my confusion.
Thanks in advance
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 4, 2012 8:13:03 AM

no it does not equal 3.2 ghz. its 1.6ghz for your both cores together. get the 6670 for now. but try upgrade your entire system soon
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 4, 2012 7:34:09 PM

GHz is a frequency, not a measurement of performance. It is the frequency that some parts of the CPU run at. Having two cores does not equal a similar CPU with one core and a frequency of 3.2GHz. Two cores at 1.6GHz are still just two cores at 1.6GHz, not a single core at 3.2GHz. If a game can't use two cores efficiently, then it will perform worse than a similar single core CPU at 3.2GHz.

Like I said, GHz does not mean performance. For example, a Core 2-based Pentium at 1.6GHz is slower than a Sandy Bridge-based Pentium at 1.4GHz. Another more extreme example is how a Netburst CPU with two cores at 2GHz is weaker than a single core Sandy Bridge CPU at 1.6GHz even if the game can use both cores effectively.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 5, 2012 6:00:29 PM

but I thought 2 cores at lower frequency are better than single core at higher frequency.? atleast in games they are.. not considering single threaded applications. and most games today do use multiple cores. but still the 6670 should not be bottle necked too much if at all by his pentium d 1.6 ghz
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 5, 2012 8:08:47 PM

That's not a Pentium D. A Pentium D is a dual-core version of the Pentium 4 made by using two single-core dies that communicated on the front-side bus. The E2140 is based on a Core 2-Duo that uses a single dual-core die (more efficient and lets the FSB work more on feeding the CPU with memory throughput because the FSB is also used to link some older CPUs such as the Pentium Ds to the system RAM).

Two cores at say 2.4GHz can be better than a single core 3.2GHz CPU that is otherwise identical. A CPU with two cores at half the frequency of a single core CPU that is otherwise identical can never beat the single core model, although depending on the workload, they can shoot for similar performance.

Games today are usually multi-threaded, but most games still only use one or two threads effectively and the other two, not so much. However, most such games also aren't huge CPU hogs, so it's usually okay.

Any CPU at 1.6GHz can be a bottle-neck for any graphics card today. Even a dual-core Sandy Bridge CPU could struggle at 1.6GHz in gaming. Having a low-end graphics card doesn't make a game use less CPU power if you drop graphics quality to stop the 6670 from being a graphics bottle-neck. Dropping physics, shadows, and such can drop CPU load, but you'd have to do a lot.

I don't think that most modern games would work well whatsoever on that CPU. It's simply too weak. Tom's made two builds, one with the G530 (2.4GHz dual-core Sandy Bridge CPU) and with the G680 (3GHz dual-core Sandy Bridge CPU. The second build had a weaker graphics card to go with the stronger CPU, yet it performed a little better in most games.

That G530 is around twice as fast as OP's CPU. The math is not looking good for it.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 1:20:42 AM

well I have an athlon 64x2 4600 dual core at 2.4ghz and was thinking about installing a radeon hd5570 in it for time being replacing the 5450 until I build a new system. so in my case too will it be bottlenecked?
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 1:50:56 AM

Your system CPU is probably better, but not by much. Whether it is a bottle-neck or not would depend on what games you play. Honestly, instead of upgrading old computers, the best thing to do would be to save up some more money until you can get a new platform (new motherboard and CPU, you'd also need new memory for a modern system).

If you want to prolong it anyway, then you can try overclocking it... It still won't get near even a Celeron G540, although you might be happier with what it gives if you can bring it past 3GHz. I don't remember how well those old Athlon 64 x2 CPUs overclock, so doing that would take some research. I recommend a new computer anyway because it'd last longer as a gaming machine than your current computer will.

If you want, you can give me a budget and I can tell you what can be done with it. If you guys want to stick with your current computers, then I could also give some tips that don't involve replacing everything yet, but I do recommend new builds. Upgrading an old one only goes well for so long before hardware/driver incompatibilities start to pile up.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 4:10:34 AM

cant overclock it as it is an HP. and prebuilt pc's have fixed bioses. it is 4 yr old system with only 250w bestec psu with 14A on 12v. and I made the mistake of buying 5450 a few months back. so I thought 5570 is the best I could do on this system. right now I have no money for a new system. I play at 1440*900 or lower. and I intend to play all current games on the market no problem even its on low settings
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 1:12:23 PM

You might find like a very cheap motherboard for a system that old that that can overclock. Point is that it's not worth upgrading something like that. If you want a graphics upgrade, pretty much anything more than that 5450 might be enough to kill that PSU in a few weeks or months and that CPU might limit pretty much any modern game pretty badly regardless of the resolution that you play at.

Like I said, saving up for a new system is the best option. What you could do is incremental upgrades for now (PSU+graphics card) and later upgrade the motherboard, CPU, and RAM.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 3:14:10 PM

thanks for guiding me .. so as for the guy who started this thread should we recommend him the same way.? like get an hd6670 for now and upgrade his cpu ram and motherboard one at time as and when he acquires the cash.? that would be good. as for 5570 killing off my psu many ppl run these low end cards comfortably in stock hp and dells. tdp is only 40 watts so its not much at all.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
September 6, 2012 4:12:43 PM

I've seen many people use even low end graphics cards such as the 6670 on a 250w OEM PSU and then have a PSU failure a few weeks or months later. Maybe, just maybe, a 5570 will be fine, but those PSUs are often not trustworthy. They are used specifically because they are the minimum that can be used in the computers that they're put in (if even the minimum) without causing problems, not because they're good enough for upgrading.

Yes, I make my incremental upgrade recommendation to OP as well. If you really want to upgrade, then do so with the intent of upgrading the rest of the system later. OP, if you can increase your budget a little to get a Radeon 7750, thn it would at least be better. It's a lot faster (more future proofed for your next computer) and uses a little less electricity than the 6670. It's usually not much more expensive from what I've seen. Looking at ebay, there are several listings for under or slightly over 8000 rupees. That is my recommendation if you wantto buy from Ebay. If someone gives me some links to online stores that you can buy from, then I can also look around them to see if there are any better priced (it's not unlikely) Radeon 7750s.
m
0
l
!