Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Low end GPU Selection

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 2, 2012 4:05:46 PM

i want to play games like sleeping dogs, Bf3, Skyrim..........

Which one of the Graphics Cards to get? GT 240 1gb or HD 5450 2gb or hd 6450 1gb....

You can understand the budget by now...

i just want to make it somehow playable.....not hardcore......

i have seen youtube videos of gt 240 on above games and they are good....

my specs are :

Core i3 3.3 gHz
RAM : 4 gb DDR3
MB: Intel DH61ww
HDD : 500 GB

If it is low settings but smooth... i will play... JUST HELP ME OUT !!!!!!!

More about : low end gpu selection

October 2, 2012 4:51:26 PM

I doubt you'll have BF3 playable even on low settings with a GPU of that spec, without knowing exact budget or PSU power it's hard to recommend, but I'd advise a Radeon 7750 for ease of use and good power for a semi-low price.
Related resources
October 2, 2012 5:01:53 PM

I have an HD4830 and BF3 would hardly play on low, you need like a 7750 or 7770 to be able to play it.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 5:08:48 PM

A 4870 is more powerful than a 7770 but lacks DX11
October 2, 2012 5:14:43 PM

As others suggested get a used gc from ebay.
Gpus mentioned by you wouldn't give playable frames
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 5:34:41 PM

Just get this or this (only if you can afford it), and you're pretty much good to go. They'll be quite enough. You'll definitely won't be able to play on "Ultra", but "Medium"/"High" will do.
I highly recommend them both.
October 2, 2012 6:21:34 PM

Get the 6770 or the 7750. the 7770 needs a 6 pin and not all PCs have one. Comparable to price to the 240, but better in performance.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 6:33:22 PM

yialanliu said:
The 7770 needs a 6-pin and not all PCs have one.


What the hell are you talking about?

1. It's not "PC" that needs to have a "6-pin" connector, it's the PSU that needs to have the right cable/slot.

2. These days even the most cheapest and simply-made modern PSUs have the "6+2" cables (where you can simply detach two pins if you don't need them)...and those PSUs have been around for more than 4 years now. Even the most cheapest PSU (like this one, for example) has AT LEAST one "6+2"-type cable. In what cave were you living until now?

3. To your information, HD 6770 has 6-pin power connector too.

4. To OP: I highly suggest that you look at this and this, before you make any decisions.
a c 92 U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 6:43:08 PM

simon12 said:
A 4870 is more powerful than a 7770 but lacks DX11

Im pretty sure the 7770 is more powerful as the 4870 is only slightly more powerful than a 5770 which is pretty much a 7750, the 7770 is 20% more powerful than that.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 7:00:25 PM

Im not to sure on the 5450 ive ran skyrim with it and it didnt play so well
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 7:06:51 PM

esrever said:
I'm pretty sure that HD 7770 is more powerful than the HD 4870.


Well...actually...
October 2, 2012 7:39:15 PM

@master
The gpus you have suggested might cross the budget
@OP - Better take a look at ebay
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 7:42:36 PM

hitesh12 said:
The GPUs you have suggested might cross the budget.

>100$
Are you friggin' kidding me? If he wants to upgrade his GPU for something better, then I think that he's ready to spend at least that much, and "100$ for quality GPU" is VERY cheap.
October 2, 2012 7:51:05 PM

"Which one of the Graphics Cards to get? GT 240 1gb or HD 5450 2gb or hd 6450 1gb....
"
Do you really think OP has this much budget ?
@OP - It would be better if you mention your budget
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 7:57:48 PM

Hitesh12: The ones mentioned by him are all in "50~100$" range, so yeah - I think that he can pretty much afford one 100$-card, man. :\
I've checked that thoroughly: all best versions of HD 5450 and HD 6450 cost AT LEAST 80$, 100$ wouldn't be much more than that, but the cards for that price would be MUCH better than both HD 5450 and HD 6450. Putting it simply: 100$-card would be an optimal choice in this particular case, because GT 240 would be waaay too old and weak of an option, and both HD 5450 and HD 6450 are quite weak too (not satisfying enough even for low range). Well, if he really wouldn't be able to pay even just 100$, then yeah, he can get HD 6450.
a c 92 U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 8:39:19 PM

master_chen said:
Well...actually...

thats actually a pretty useless compare as non of that will correlate to actual performance. If you can find actually gaming performance, its always completely different than that. That site is basically useless. Its actually worse since it gives a false representation of information.



the 7770 is slightly faster than the 5830. Should be half way between the 5830 and 5850. higher than the 4870 and even the 4890.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:05:39 PM

esrever said:
That site is basically useless.


No it is not. It helps to get the approximate picture about cards differences, and in the case of upgrading (not building from scratch) that matters more than benchmark scores.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:13:33 PM

simon12 said:
Look on Ebay for a used Radeon 4870 like this one http://www.ebay.com/itm/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-Video-Card-/... you could get one even cheaper by bidding. Otherwise look for a 6670 as a minimum for those games and don't trust youtube videos.


may as well step up to a 4890 as they seem to be in the same price range and there's 10% more performance there.
a c 92 U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:26:50 PM

master_chen said:
No it is not. It helps to get the approximate picture about cards differences, and in the case of upgrading (not building from scratch) that matters more than benchmark scores.

They are absolutely useless because the differences in architectures mean all the theoretical numbers like that are not compatible. In the end you get no realistic information from it. Even the power consumption numbers on there are not the realistic values. In the end you just have a bunch of number which show no relevance to performance. You might as well look at a random number generator.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:36:51 PM

esrever said:
They are absolutely useless because the differences in architectures mean all the theoretical numbers like that are not compatible. In the end you get no realistic information from it. Even the power consumption numbers on there are not the realistic values. In the end you just have a bunch of number which show no relevance to performance. You might as well look at a random number generator.


A little exaggerated towards the end, but pretty much the truth.... Gaming benchmarks from trusted sources are much more useful...

Anyways the OP hasn't even responded yet, you never know he may even consider expanding his budget...

within the $100 range I would suggest the 7770, no point in buying dated tech even if it is slightly more powerful
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:37:53 PM

esrever said:
In the end you get no realistic information from it. Even the power consumption numbers on there are not the realistic values. In the end you just have a bunch of number which show no relevance to performance. You might as well look at a random number generator.

You are being delusional. All of these numbers are taken from actual stock parameters, not just randomly generated.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:57:20 PM

master_chen said:
You are being delusional. All of these numbers are taken from actual stock parameters, not just randomly generated.



Here is an example of why HWcompare isnt that reliable and why most people do not use it:

http://www.hwcompare.com/13324/geforce-gtx-570-vs-gefor...

Lets exclude power consumption, the 570 wins 2/3 of these selected benchmarks, however in a gaming scenario the 660 performs a fair bit better...

Fair enough the texel rate is almost 80% better but some people may not understand this and see it as a win for the 570...

Then there is the disclaimer at the bottom:

"Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit."

Overall there is just not enough information to make a proper decision on which performs better in a gaming scenario using this site..
a c 92 U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 10:17:11 PM

master_chen said:
You are being delusional. All of these numbers are taken from actual stock parameters, not just randomly generated.

Theoretical numbers are useless if you are looking at different cards with completely different utilization of the numbers and the procedure of how its done. I have already shown how the numbers are wrong regarding the 7770. If you want theoretical numbers with little application to real world results like the ones on that site, go check the float point performance of the graphics cards on Wikipedia. Might as well go all theoretical if you don't want real world performance.
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 11:08:31 PM

master_chen said:
That's not even funny.


While I agree, it's the best performance per dollar. OP is on a budget.

Don't project your mistrust of refurbished items on others.
October 3, 2012 10:48:13 AM

hey guys, one of my friend is using hd 4650.... My god. He is running bf3 on medium-high settings ......Skyrim, Max Payne 3 on MAX !!!!!. I got a deal of XFX 4650 1gb DDR 2 only for 32euros!!!! SHOULD I BUY IT?? AND WILL IT WORK ON MY DDR3 Motherboard??
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 2:24:25 PM

No, its not a gaming card, its more for media pc's....

€32 is not going to get you a card capable of playing those games...

Your going to have to increase your budget a fair bit...
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 2:31:01 PM

I disagree- if thats your budget then thats your budget. You may need to lower resolution and/or details but it will work. And it will fit your motherboard. I dont think they made agp 4650s but just verify its pci-e

From benchmarks it looks like it should be playable at 1440x900 or 1280x1024 as long as no AA or AF and low to med settings. If thats good enough then go for it.
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 3:52:13 PM

bliq said:
I disagree- if thats your budget then thats your budget. You may need to lower resolution and/or details but it will work. And it will fit your motherboard. I dont think they made agp 4650s but just verify its pci-e

From benchmarks it looks like it should be playable at 1440x900 or 1280x1024 as long as no AA or AF and low to med settings. If thats good enough then go for it.


^^This is all sorts of wrong

It will probably run on low settings but it will not be getting a playable framrate
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 7:11:00 PM

gamerACEify said:
HD 4650.

Yeah.

gamerACEify said:
Max Payne 3 on MAX.

No.
October 3, 2012 10:48:52 PM

I'd go for the 4650 since it's fairly priced.

People here always tell you to buy the best, but honestly, if you don't have the money or don't value the difference from med and ultra at the money, I think you'll be fine.

Ignore people telling you to buy more than you can afford.

Best of luck to you with that card.
a b U Graphics card
October 4, 2012 12:38:41 AM

yialanliu said:
Ignore people telling you to buy more than you can afford.


If you're pointing on me, you are absolutely mistaken.
!