Shop for All
|
DMX-WL1 BRAVIA Wireless Link -... |
Compare the top 5 lowest prices by hovering your mouse over the product names on the left |
$499.99 |
|
Radeon HD 4850 Video Card | $104.99 | |
| GeForce GTX 295 Red Edition Video... | $587.77 | ||
|
GeForce GTX 260 Video Card | $172.99 | |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Video Card | $319.99 |
- radeon 3800
- nvidia geforce gt 130 512mb
- best graphics card under 100
- 9500 gt benchmark
- best cheap gaming card
- review nvidia geforce gt 130 512mb
- how to turn up geforce 9500 gt settings
- best graphic card under 100
- pci express gaming card
- core clock speed mhz 650 graphic card is this good
- nvidia geforce 9500 gt vs nvidia 8600
- geforce 9500 is not better than 8600
- cheapest gaming card
- directx shader model
- cheap good gaming card
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
Friday the 24th
Exterminate Santa Claus's elves. Use the arrows to move, S to grab the elves, and A or W to attack them with your sword.
|
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
|
Sponsored links
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (97) |
- Share
Best PCI-E Card For under $100:
| GeForce 9500 GT GDDR3 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | G96 |
| Process: | 55/65nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 32 |
| Texture Units: | 16 |
| ROPs: | 8 |
| Memory Bus: | 128-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 550 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 700 (1400 effective) |
| DirectX / Shader Model | DX 10 / SM 4.0 |
The 9500 GT GDDR3 is essentially a reworking and optimization of the popular 8600 GTS GPU on a smaller process. Even though the clock speeds are lower than those of its 8600 GTS brethren, the 9500 GT GDDR3 performs a bit faster in the limited benchmarks we’ve seen, and the card has been found in stock for as low as $70 online. The extra $30 is well worth stepping up to a Radeon 3850, but if you want the absolute cheapest gaming card and don’t plan to go higher than the 1280x1024 resolution, the 9500 GT is a good option. Just be sure to get the faster GDDR3 version, not the slower DDR2-equipped cards.
BEST PCI-E CARD FOR $100:
| Radeon 3850 512MB | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | RV670 |
| Process: | 55nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 320 |
| Texture Units: | 16 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 670 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 833 (1666 effective) |
| DirectX / Shader Model | DX 10.1 / SM 4.0 |
The Radeon 3850 is the only high-performance 512MB card for about $100; this is an absolute steal for the powerful level of performance this card will supply. Easily capturing the best price/performance segment at $100, the Radeon 3850 will game at 1650x1080 with relative ease, even breaking into 1920x1200 territory.
BEST PCI-E CARD FOR $125: Tie
| GeForce 9600 GT 512MB | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | G92 |
| Process: | 65nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 64 |
| Texture Units: | 32 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 650 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 900 (1800 effective) |
| DirectX / Shader Model | DX 10 / SM 4.0 |
The new 9600 GT is Nvidia’s answer to the Radeon 3800 series: cheap, powerful, and efficient, the 9600 GT usually performs a bit below the 3870 with no antialiasing, and is a bit faster than the 3870 when AA is enabled. The 9600 GT is usually a few dollars cheaper than the 3870, although the prices are close enough that both cards are now recommended buys.
| Radeon 3870 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | RV670 |
| Process: | 55nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 320 |
| Texture Units: | 16 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 775 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 1125 (2250 effective) |
| DirectX / Shader Model | DX 10.1 / SM 4.0 |
The Radeon 3870 is a speedy card for the price, and has a slight advantage versus its 9600 GT competitor when antialiasing is disabled; when AA is enabled the tables are turned and the 9600 GT claims the advantage. With both of these cards within spitting distance as far as price is concerned, though, both are easy recommendations.
- What is the best graphics card I can buy for my inspiron 1520? [Graphic & Displays]
- Best graphics card for 1680X1050 resolution? [Graphic & Displays]
- What is the best graphics card out right now for NVIDIA? ATI? [Graphic & Displays]
- Best graphics card for charts? [Graphic & Displays]
- Asus P5N32-E - Best graphics card? [Graphic & Displays]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 5
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- Fastest Single Core CPU?
- AMD 939 upgrade options (warhammer!)
- Unexplainable high prices !!!
- Best configuration for 3d animation
- Upgrading? CPU, GFX or RAM?
- HOWTO: Overclock C2Q (Quads) and C2D (Duals) - Guide v1.6.1
- Phenom and Ati Card
- Questions about Q6600 & 9600GT.
- GUIDE: 3+GHz Core 2 Duo Budget System for $426 (Overclock)
- Watercooling Core i7 in Antec 1200 questions
- MEMORY FAQ (please read before posting)
- Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H dead? or maybe not...
- [LGA 1366] Best Motherboard, $ unlimited ???
- Motherboards confusion
The 2x 9800gtx's specs are wrong
Accidentally took the same specs as the 4850 in crossfire.
Not that it matters a lot, but hey
Serious look here http://support.ati.com/ics/support [...] erID=10551
I wish i could get HD4850 for only 175$.
And that is the cheapest Gigabyte model.
It costs 230$ where i live
And HD4870 costs 340$.
I think you need to revise the texts on the AGP cards. Both for drivers (as noted above) and a few more clues regarding the performance.
Would someone fix the table on the last page of this article.
I guess you forgot to mention the 9800GT. Its out for purchase and you can get one for around 140$-160$.
4850 costs $250 here and at that price it's still worth it.
First time in a LONG time that ATI is dominating Tom's recommend list. Good to see.
There is something wrong with the table on the last page
THe 9800GT is mentioned... it's the 8800GT. :-D
Can they take the time to write new paragraphs? Even just to slightly change the wording so we can see that the authors actually give a #$%5.
Official drivers now work for AGP ATI cards. Get with it.
Good to see another update; the list needed one. Though there are some comments I have to make... As well, of course, as my slight disappointment that it appears that while still a pinned thread, it appears that the thread in the Graphics & Displays forum is no longer quite connected with the list itself.
Can they take the time to write new paragraphs? Even just to slightly change the wording so we can see that the authors actually give a #$%5.Official drivers now work for AGP ATI cards. Get with it.
Alot of Work Goes into Testing the cards ALOT! and besides this is a monthly article that most people will simply flip through to thier price point see what card they need then run to Newegg. So extra work on the article may fall on deaf ears.
I agree I like to hears each persons opinion on each card, but even I just like to skim this article each month.
It's very pleasant to see Radeon finally get some Face time on the BVCftM charts. It's been a GeForce world for so long, and even if I have dabbled in the dark side, it's always a pleasant relief to see my champion back on the board.
great work guys! Keep it up!
I still think Tom's should recommend single board graphics cards at the higher end even though some crossfire/SLI configurations are better. Some people don't want SLI/CF configurations, power requirements, and some can't run it due to their chipset or limited PCIe slots.
I still think Tom's should recommend single board graphics cards at the higher end even though some crossfire/SLI configurations are better. Some people don't want SLI/CF configurations, power requirements, and some can't run it due to their chipset or limited PCIe slots.
I did. The 4870 is in there... that's the best performing single card for the money. The 260 and 280 are overpriced by my reckoning.
If they lower the price, or the 4870 X2 comes in at a reasonable price, those will be put on the list too.
Even if the 280 is overpriced, isn't it still faster than the 4870? It's still good to see the 4870 in there and I'm sure the x2 will make it in somewhere.
I think this review is much, much better than the July. Good stuff and thanks for the disclaimers at the beginning!!!
Keep up the good work!
Ahem - the tables on the last two pages don't seem to be rendering.