Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Best PCIe Card: Under $80

Best Graphics Cards For The Money: January 2010
By

Best PCI Express (PCIe) Card For ~$50:

Radeon HD 4650 (Check Prices)

Great 1280x1024 performance in most games, 1680x1050 with lowered detail

Radeon HD 4650
Codename: RV730
Process: 55nm
Universal Shaders: 320
Texture Units: 32
ROPs: 16
Memory Bus: 128-bit
Core Speed MHz: 600
Memory Speed MHz: 400 (800 effective)
DirectX/Shader Model: DX 10.1/SM 4.1

You will not find a card that packs more punch than ATI's Radeon HD 4650 under the alluring $50 price point. With solid stock performance and an overclockable GPU, this card is an excellent starting point for our list of recommendations, and a wholly worthwhile upgrade if you're currently stuck using a motherboard with integrated graphics.

Best PCI Express (PCIe) Card For ~$65:  Tie

Radeon HD 4670 (Check Prices)

Good 1680x1050 performance in most games

Radeon HD 4670
Codename: RV730
Process: 55nm
Universal Shaders: 320
Texture Units: 32
ROPs: 16
Memory Bus: 128-bit
Core Speed MHz: 750
Memory Speed MHz: 1,000 (2,000 effective)
DirectX/Shader Model: DX 10.1/SM 4.1

With the release of Nvidia's GeForce GT 240, ATI's Radeon HD 4670 is no longer the most powerful reference card without a dedicated power connector. However, it remains a compelling solution at the $65 price point, which Nvidia's solution simply hasn't hit yet.

Performance is excellent and power usage is very low, making this product an impressive performer all-around. Its accelerated clock rates and modestly-higher price tag are worth considering if you originally had your eye on the Radeon HD 4650.

GeForce 9600 GSO (Check Prices)

Good 1680x1050 performance in most games

GeForce 9600 GSO
Codename: G94/G92
Process: 65nm
Universal Shaders: 48 (G94) / 96 (G92)
Texture Units: 24 (G94) / 48 (G92)
ROPs: 12
Memory Bus: 256-bit (G94)/128-bit (G92)
Core/Shader Speed MHz: 550 / 1,375
Memory Speed MHz: 800 (1,600 effective)
DirectX/Shader Model: DX 10/SM 4.0

The GeForce 9600 GSO is seems to be getting quite a bit harder to find, and is likely being end-of-life'd soon in favor of the new GeForce GT 240. Nevertheless, as long as it is available, the GeForce 9600 GSO remains a powerful competitor compared to the Radeon HD 4670. While the GeForce requires a dedicated PCIe power connector to supply more juice than the Radeon, it does offer better performance in some situations.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 117 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 11 Hide
    shubham1401 , January 11, 2010 5:22 AM
    Nice article as usual.

    Nvidia has nothing to compete after GTS 250.

    Though I like that they call 9800GT LEGENDARY.
  • 10 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 12:00 PM
    Notty = absolute tool. He is logging on his forum alts and giving people thumbs down. Randomizer caught him logging on forum alts last night too.

    IP ban this sad tool please.
  • 10 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 11:42 AM
    You're an idiot notty, the 5850 is at least 20% and more like 30-40% faster than the gtx280. The gtx295 is about 5-10% faster than the 5870 in selected titles.
Other Comments
  • 11 Hide
    shubham1401 , January 11, 2010 5:22 AM
    Nice article as usual.

    Nvidia has nothing to compete after GTS 250.

    Though I like that they call 9800GT LEGENDARY.
  • 7 Hide
    WheelsOfConfusion , January 11, 2010 5:52 AM
    The "Best PCIe Card For ~$155" says it's a Tie, but only lists the 5770.
  • 5 Hide
    The Lady Slayer , January 11, 2010 6:03 AM
    Australians might be interested to know that MSY have backstock of 512Mb 4850s that they're clearing out at
  • 5 Hide
    The Lady Slayer , January 11, 2010 6:04 AM
    ...clearing out at under $90 per card.
  • 0 Hide
    skora , January 11, 2010 6:23 AM
    Have you done any benchmarking of the 5770 in CF? Seems like the low 128bit bus might stifle performance too much if trying to run it hard at 1920 or at all at 2560.

    Great article, thanks for keeping this updated every few months!
  • 3 Hide
    skora , January 11, 2010 6:25 AM
    Also, at the $145 price point, you state the 5750, but the label for the spec chart says 5770. The specs are for the 5750 though.
  • -2 Hide
    neiroatopelcc , January 11, 2010 6:29 AM
    Not much new since last year really. Except availability changes.

    How much slower are two 4870-512 cards in cf in comparison to two 4790-1gb cards ? Do the 512mb memory in general hinder them @ 1680 or 1920 ? (the 'how much vram yada yada' article doesn't deal with cf far as I remember)
  • -1 Hide
    zinabas , January 11, 2010 7:05 AM
    I can tell you that a 4850 512mb can get slowed down on memory hungry games all the down at 1280x960. Oblivion would be my case and point. (Texture packs do that for those of you wondering.)
  • 6 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 8:19 AM
    Nice article but the Heirarchy chart at the end is screwed up badly. If you are going to pretend the 5850 is the same speed as a gtx280 (seriously now), then at least pretend the 5870 is the same as the gtx295.

    I can assure you the 5870 is a lot closer to the gtx295 than either the gtx280 or gtx285 is to the 5850.

    Either give the 5850 it's own level in the chart or move the 5870 into the gtx295/4870x2 position please. The gtx280 should also be moved down a notch from the 4850x2/gtx285 I feel.
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 8:51 AM
    I wonder what Fermi will do to this chart in the near future? Hopefully we'll see some ATI 5870 price cuts and we'll all be happy, only time can tell since we have no real information =(
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 8:55 AM
    Heh, I have 8800GT (G92 chip). I can't believe it's been more than two years since I bought it and it's still a competitive piece of hardware (both 9800GT and GTS 250 are essentially the same card).
  • 9 Hide
    shubham1401 , January 11, 2010 9:20 AM
    Quote:
    Heh, I have 8800GT (G92 chip). I can't believe it's been more than two years since I bought it and it's still a competitive piece of hardware (both 9800GT and GTS 250 are essentially the same card).



    Both 9800Gt and GTS250 are very different cards.
    GTS 250 is faster.

    You should say 8800GT and 9800GT are essentially the same cards. :sarcastic: 
  • 3 Hide
    AMW1011 , January 11, 2010 9:41 AM
    The same thing, the GTX 295 has no place in the market and the "notable gains" you speak of are not very notable at all.

    The GTX 295 has no place between the 5870, 5970, and 5850 crossfire.

    Also the 5870 is a far better deal than 2 4890s, Tom's seems to completely ignore the benefits of a single card over a dual solution:

    1. Higher minimum FPS = the single card tends to be smoother.
    2. Less bugs and glitches from SLI or CFX
    3. Much more linear scaling instead of SLI and CFX being all over the place at times.
    4. That whole cooler running and less power consumption can mean much better overclocking.
    5. Since the 5xxx series is new you CANNOT ignore that they will get better with time with driver improvements, the GTX 280 went from being beaten by the 9800 GX2 to tying with it and coming out on top at times with driver improvements, however the GTX 2xx and 4xxx series are at their peaks.
  • -1 Hide
    Efrayim , January 11, 2010 9:57 AM
    Thank you guys for taking the time and doing this! Great articulate as always.
  • 3 Hide
    Efrayim , January 11, 2010 9:59 AM
    Article*
  • 1 Hide
    leon2006 , January 11, 2010 11:16 AM
    It's still good to hold on to existing CF 4890.
  • 10 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 11:42 AM
    You're an idiot notty, the 5850 is at least 20% and more like 30-40% faster than the gtx280. The gtx295 is about 5-10% faster than the 5870 in selected titles.
  • 10 Hide
    Anonymous , January 11, 2010 12:00 PM
    Notty = absolute tool. He is logging on his forum alts and giving people thumbs down. Randomizer caught him logging on forum alts last night too.

    IP ban this sad tool please.
  • 0 Hide
    neiroatopelcc , January 11, 2010 12:07 PM
    psycho sykesThe said article deal with it as it's known that CF/SLi don't double memory.

    No it doesn't deal with it!
    You know cf doesn't doublt vram. Good! That's EXACTLY my point.
    The article concludes that 512mb is enough for most cases. But the article doesn't deal with CF, and therefor does not deal with the effect of doubling the performance - which enables higher resolutions and more AA. 512mb is enough for 1680x1050 and 4xAA - fine - but what if you were to run at 1920x1280 with 8xAA and 16xAF ? Would 512mb still suffice in AFR mode on modern games? There's so much texture data these days that I'm not sure it does.
Display more comments