Unsure where to go for a computer upgrade. I do mainstream gaming at 1280x1024 resolution, mainly flight sims, a bit of Witcher and hoping to have a go at Fallout 3, Dragon Age and the upcoming Elder Scrolls V. Problem is, do I go for a somewhat cheaper GTX 260 or 275, or DX11 with the GTX 465 or ATI's 5850? Or would a 5770 or 5750 be able to handle games at that resolution with near top quality settings? I don't want to buy a new card and immediately have to dial it down. I don't know how much difference resolution makes when it comes to performance. Or is ATI coming up with something new soon?
Thanks in advance.
260, 275 or 5850?
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
If I were to buy a card right now, I'd either buy a GTX 260 or Radeon 5850. The GTX 275 doesn't outperform the 260 enough to justify its price premium. So of DX10 parts, I would go with the GTX 260.
If you wanted to step up to DX11, the water gets a little muddier. The 5850 is definitely a great card with great performance, but it's a little expensive. You could go with the 5830, but price/performance of 5850 is better. You could step down to the 5770, but in contemporary games it is actually outperformed by the GTX 260, which is about the same price as the 5770. So you'd be paying for futureproofing at the expense of performance.
I built a computer for a friend a few weeks ago and had to decide between the GTX 260 and the Radeon 5850. In their respective price points, both cards are good. The GTX 260 was about $100 cheaper, though, and would fulfill all his current gaming needs, so I went with the 260. We've been playing borderlands at 1920x1200 with full settings turned on, and it plays it flawlessly. So I'd think that the 260 would have plenty of horsepower for the games that you mentioned. Of course, the 5850 is DX11 compatible and has more power, but you pay for it in the price.
So again, I would go with a GTX 260 if you wanted to save some money, and a Radeon 5850 if you wanted the same bang for your buck, but for more buck.
If you wanted to step up to DX11, the water gets a little muddier. The 5850 is definitely a great card with great performance, but it's a little expensive. You could go with the 5830, but price/performance of 5850 is better. You could step down to the 5770, but in contemporary games it is actually outperformed by the GTX 260, which is about the same price as the 5770. So you'd be paying for futureproofing at the expense of performance.
I built a computer for a friend a few weeks ago and had to decide between the GTX 260 and the Radeon 5850. In their respective price points, both cards are good. The GTX 260 was about $100 cheaper, though, and would fulfill all his current gaming needs, so I went with the 260. We've been playing borderlands at 1920x1200 with full settings turned on, and it plays it flawlessly. So I'd think that the 260 would have plenty of horsepower for the games that you mentioned. Of course, the 5850 is DX11 compatible and has more power, but you pay for it in the price.
So again, I would go with a GTX 260 if you wanted to save some money, and a Radeon 5850 if you wanted the same bang for your buck, but for more buck.
-
Cryoburner
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:25 am
From a silencing perspective, the Radeons draw a lot less power, making them easier to cool. The GTX 260's performance is arguably comparable to the HD 5770, though it does outperform the 5770 on some games. On the other hand, the 5770 draws around half as much power as the 260, both under load and at idle, making it much easier to keep cool, and thus relatively quiet. Also, at least here in the US, the GTX 260 currently does cost more than the HD 5770, so you are paying for that extra bit of performance. At Newegg, there are HD 5770s for under $140 after mail in rebate (or $155 without rebate), while their best price on a GTX 260 is currently $170.
You mention gaming at 1280x1024, so getting a higher-end graphics card may be a little wasteful, since current mid-range cards should handle current games at that resolution just fine. As for future games, it's less easy to say, but with the cost of a 5850 being nearly double that of a 5770, it might be better to stick with a mid-range card, and put the money saved toward a more powerful card a couple years down the line, when the additional performance is needed.
Of course, if you plan on moving to a higher-res screen relatively soon, that should be taken into account as well. At 1920x1200, the additional performance offered by the 5850 would be good to have, even with today's games.
You mention gaming at 1280x1024, so getting a higher-end graphics card may be a little wasteful, since current mid-range cards should handle current games at that resolution just fine. As for future games, it's less easy to say, but with the cost of a 5850 being nearly double that of a 5770, it might be better to stick with a mid-range card, and put the money saved toward a more powerful card a couple years down the line, when the additional performance is needed.
Of course, if you plan on moving to a higher-res screen relatively soon, that should be taken into account as well. At 1920x1200, the additional performance offered by the 5850 would be good to have, even with today's games.
-
~El~Jefe~
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: New York City zzzz
- Contact:
5850, no comparison to the dx 10, 4 year old line of nvidia. *shivers*
dx 11 is more graphics for less demand. It also looks awesome. I am assuming you are gaming at such a level because you want things to look awesome.
dx10.1 is much better than dx10, uses less processor power and looks like 10.8 if such a number were to exist. dx 10 is like kinda icky.
dx 11 is more graphics for less demand. It also looks awesome. I am assuming you are gaming at such a level because you want things to look awesome.
dx10.1 is much better than dx10, uses less processor power and looks like 10.8 if such a number were to exist. dx 10 is like kinda icky.