PCIe Interface: $150 To $240
Best PCIe Card For $150 :
Good 1920x1200 performance in most games, some with lowered detail
| Codename: | RV770 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 800 |
| Texture Units: | 40 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 625 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 993 (1,986 effective) |
| DirectX / Shader Model: | DX 10.1/SM 4.0 |
The Radeon HD 4850 is the new people’s champion, instantly bringing yesterday’s $300 performance level down to the mainstream $160 price point. This card has a lot of potential when used on its own, and becomes a devastating force when paired with a second 4850 in a CrossFire configuration.
Best PCIe Card For $170 :
Good 1920x1200 performance in most games, some with lowered detail
| Codename: | RV770 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 800 |
| Texture Units: | 40 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 625 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 993 (1,986 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10.1/SM 4.0 |
For a few dollars over the base-model Radeon 4850, a 1 GB version is available. While raw performance is not all that different, the extra video RAM is helpful in some situations and with some game titles.
Best PCIe Card For $210 : Tie
Good 1920x1200 performance
| Codename: | RV770 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 800 |
| Texture Units: | 40 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 750 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 900 (3,600 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10.1/SM 4.0 |
The Radeon HD 4870 offers the same architecture that the HD 4850 series does, except it is paired with its secret weapon: brand-new GDDR5 memory. This technology provides about twice as much throughput as the GDDR3 does, so its 900 MHz clock speed is comparable to a 3,600 MHz effective memory speed. This edge allows the 4870 to up the ante and offer a very compelling level of performance for the price. It even competes with the more expensive GTX 280 in some titles.
| Codename: | GT200 |
| Process: | 65 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 192 |
| Texture Units: | 64 |
| ROPs: | 28 |
| Memory Bus: | 448-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 576 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 999 (1,998 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10/SM 4.0 |
The GeForce GTX 260 offers a compelling level of performance now that its price has been reduced to $220, allowing it to trade blows with the Radeon HD 4870 on its own turf. This is one of those situations where a buyer really should look at which card is best for the games he or she plans to play (although you really can’t go wrong with either card).
Related Stories :
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: April 2013
- In Pictures: The Best Graphics Card Values In History
- Best Of The Best: High-End Graphics Card Roundup
- Matching Doom3 With The Best Graphics Card
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: December 2011
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: November 2011
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: October 2011
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: September 2011
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: August 2011
- Best Graphics Cards For The Money: July 2011
Really no change sense Decembers review. I wonder how much the GTX 295 will change things up?
would be interesting to have a dual card section in the hierarchy chary and go back over the older models to see how they shape up (where applicable). i'd love to see where my 7600gt would sit as compared to a single card...
i think they should reformat it... pick a bunch of resolutions and show us the best cardsssssssss fpr low, medium and high settings for the majority of the games. or three different pric ranges for a specific res.
Quote"It turns out that the Radeon 4870, when equipped with a whole gigabyte of GDDR5 RAM, can up the ante to compete against the GeForce GTX 260+ in some titles".
Interesting way of wording it.......Since it was the nvida card that was beefed up to the Radeon card,which by the way was out first.
All in the wording isn't it?
A few days too early. GTX 285 will lunch on January 9th. It's basically a die shrank version of 280 with higher clock speed.
A report by Fudzilla shows it is questionable that the GTX 295 will actually debut at the $500 MSRP... Early indication is closer to $600.
Good news is there are signs that the prices of GTX 280 are dropping and as mentioned in article, others will likely to follow with the actual launch of the GTX 295 (and the GTX 285). :-)
Yeah, I am going to have to stay tuned for Feb. charts. :-)
It would be nice to have some numbers to inform the readers further about the average performance per dollar of each card recommended, also to have the best bang for the buck at the targeted resolution and in general.
I believe this to be the first time Tom's acknowledge the existence of the 4870 1GB end even now it is being acknowledged as "It turns out that the Radeon 4870, when equipped with a whole gigabyte of GDDR5 RAM, can up the ante to compete against the GeForce GTX 260+ in some titles."
)
I think it would be better if you would turn this around because GTX 260+ was only launched to match the 4870 1GB.
(btw, i am no fanboy cause i am gonna sell my 4870 to get a 260+ because it is slightly better
The GTX 280 is only $315 on newegg I think it should be on the list between the 4850 x2s.
The GTX 280 is certainly looking better, as prices have dropped sharply in the last week. Clearly they're getting rid of the stock to set up the soon-to-be-here 285.
UNfortunately, that's the nature of this article - it's a 'snaphot', and on a month like this when new products are coming out, things are going to change quite a bit.
A few days too early. GTX 285 will lunch on January 9th. It's basically a die shrank version of 280 with higher clock speed.
Shrank ain't a word cuz my teacher said it ain't. I think you meant shrunk, which happens to be the past tense of the word shrink.
i think they should reformat it... pick a bunch of resolutions and show us the best cardsssssssss fpr low, medium and high settings for the majority of the games. or three different pric ranges for a specific res.
I agree. I have always felt that there could be a better way of formatting these articles but didn't know what to suggest. I would make my decision based on quality, not price. V3NOM's idea bears consideration as an alternative.
Any recommendations for non-gamer applications? Text[crispness], video editing, etc.
Shrank ain't a word cuz my teacher said it ain't. I think you meant shrunk, which happens to be the past tense of the word shrink.
Thank you.
So...finally we see the end of the AGP section (sorry Cleeve, someone had to bring it up
). I'm actually surprised you kept it this long, but from someone who has read your "Best Gaming Cards For The Money" articles since you were putting them in the forums--heh, brings back memories...
...Okay I'll shut up now.
Have to agree. Would be nice to a also see the performance differences visually, along with pricing. Would be a cool addition to these monthly reports.
i think they should reformat it... pick a bunch of resolutions and show us the best cardsssssssss fpr low, medium and high settings for the majority of the games. or three different pric ranges for a specific res.
I was thinking the same thing as I was reading through this article. The format of this article is the same month after month and that's great if you know exactly how much you want to spend on a video card--but it tells you nothing of how good each card's performance is relative to the others in adjacent price ranges. For instance, a card might be the best within a particular price range, but if it's just slightly faster than a card, which is $50 less, it might not be justified to some buyers.
I would like to see these articles formatted differently and, as per V3NOM's suggestions, rate the cards based on their overall performance per dollar at different resolutions using a standard set of benchmarks. As new benchmark apps and new hardware are introduced, you can change your standard set of benchmarks and add a date/revision so we have a reference point to compare the results. This will allow the readers to rate the cards not only on their price but on their relative performance.
This series of articles are great, but the last page "GRAPHICS CARD HIERARCHY CHART" needs some performance comparison orientation.
Also, it would be more useful to include Crossfire/SLI setups.
GTX 265 is the name, not GTX 260+.