Best Graphics Cards For The Money: December '09

[DrgnRebrn]

Great article. I too look forward to these each month. I am just trying to decide between the many different formats that are emerging from various vendors on the 5750 & 5770 cards. Powercolor has a fanless 5750 that I think would be great for my HTPC, but I still don't know if it'd be worth it to go with the *50 versus the *70...sure would like to see some reviews on cards in this segment.

 

[imrul]

cool

 

[mediatrapper]

I'm surprised the HD 4850 didn't make it on this list. It might be too powerful? Great article!

 

[Shin-san]

Something bothers me about putting the Radeon HD 4650 DDR3 version on the list so often. I could never find it around $50, but I find the DDR2 version at that price. You should at least mention the DDR2 model existing and how good it is.

 

[matrix311]

I can get the MSI R4870-MD1G 1GB 4870 from Ingram Micro for $114.04, ETA is 1/09/10 for availability.

 

[MARSOC_Operator]

[citation][nom]superpowter77[/nom]4890 is currently the top dog for conscious gamers under $200, no point discussing here a fact already proven on tomshardware article a few days ago. I currently own a 3870, 9800Gtx+, gtx 260 core 216, gtx 275, 4890 and a gtx 295(yes, I'm a freaking maniac) and just realized how overpriced the gtx 200 series are with the sole expection of the fantastic and unique for its price/performance ratio: gtx 295. If you don't have an Icore 7 you are wasting your money on gtx 200 series cards(Including the amazing gtx 295), simply because nvidia cards don't scale properly on heavy games as farcry 2 and crysis warhead(with very high settings) . I was checking prices today at newegg trying to find 4870x2 and saw a EVGA OC gtx 275 for a ridiculous price of $349. 4890 and gtx 275 are basically on same league and just got my 4890 for $169(on sale), why we need to spend almost double or at least $100 more on a video card which perform identical to 4890. people need to start reading and checking specs on real games with real configuration based on their current CPU/GPU combination to get the most of it. Currently nvidia gtx260,gtx 275 and gtx 285 are a rip off for customers.[/citation]


Agreed 100%!

 

[javimena]

[citation][nom]Summer Leigh Castle[/nom]When was the article written? Can someone point me a link? I can't find the GTX260 for $155 anywhere.[/citation]


I'm starting to think that this montly review, change the prices of the cards. It has happened several times, that the prices rise just after the cards are selected as the best cards

 

[javimena]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]The retailers don't look to my article for pricing, it's the other way around.[/citation]

In fact, I think the retailers waits this article and set the prices according to it.

 

[loykodenis]

I think they forgot about EVGA GeForce GTX 295 CO-OP FTW which has a core clock speed of 684 MHz.

 

[sledgehammer]

Cleeve, a question. Did you talk to Sapphire and Powercolor about the 4730 card as you promissed? Cause I don't see it in this month's chart again... So?! I am sure a lot of people are curious to see how it fits in the comparison.
Regards.

 

[drgnak]

[citation][nom]Shin-san[/nom]Something bothers me about putting the Radeon HD 4650 DDR3 version on the list so often. I could never find it around $50, but I find the DDR2 version at that price.[/citation]
Agreed. The DDR2 version of the card is the only card at $50, and it is rare to see the DDR3 version anywhere.

 

[pochacco007]

the 9800gt is getting remodeled and require no additional power. they range from $90-$110 from newegg and there are those that are on sale for around $80. with that in mind, it's actually not worth the investment in a gt240 as it runs about the same price. the gt240 is at 128bit as opposed to the 9800gt which is at 256bit.

ati 4670 goes for about $65-$100 and sale prices goes from $45-$80 all from newegg.

so in the end, the ati 4670 is for those on a budget and the 9800gt low power is for those on a budget and looking for a little more.

if ati can offer remodels of their ati cards that would no longer require additional power, like those of the ati 4850, then things would be really interesting. but in the mean time, the 9800gt is actually a better investment then the ati 4670.

 

[TrantaLocked]

[citation][nom]knightmike[/nom]Thanks for this wonderful article. I look forward to it every month. I was able to pick up a PNY GTS 250 1GB for $73. It's connected to an Acer 21.5" 1920x1080 monitor I got for $84. I paired it with an AMD 240. I'm currently playing Bioshock, Mass Effect, and Left 4 Dead getting a smooth 60 FPS on all three games at high settings.[/citation]

Wow sweet deal. Where did you get it?

 

[TrantaLocked]

Where is the 4770 here? It can still be found at $105-$115 and is better than the 4830 and benchmarks on this very website show the ATI Radeon 4770 512MB is as good or BEATS the Nvidia GTS 250 1GB. Yes the GTS 250 beats it some times but ONLY BY A FEW FRAMES. The 4770 was proven by tomshardware to be as good as the GTS 250. The 4770 owns the s*** for its price and should be on the top of the list for performance to price.

 

[Guest]

Nice article, very informative and interesting to read, now the bad parts (which there are only a few). I stay in SA not the USA so prices of course are much different, but not by much since we import from USA and other places for the gpu's we got. So lets start off with the GTS250, this card exists without reason, has a terrible price/performance ratio and has similar power as the 4850, yet it cost double the amount of a 4850, YES its true, the 4850 can be found for just over R1000 and the 250 for just over R2000 (convert to dollars if you want). Then the 9600GT over the 4770? please if the prices are anything to go by where i live, i can get a 4770 at R1400, against the 9600GT at R1500, And the 4770 kills the 9600 in most cases, not to mention two 4770's in xfire = amazing price/performance ratio. The Radeon 4830, a cut down 4850, Is not good at all, price here is R1700, not only is it overpriced but it also gives in a weaker performance than the 4770, i thought that it has some 4850 heritage in it, it will oc well, but i was wrong, infact with some tests i have done with the 4830, it had significant stability problems with normal use, never mind step up.

I may seem as a radeon fanboy but actually im not at all, im still running right now a 7800GS, that still gives me playable performance in every game i play, and it's paired with a athlon 3200+ yet i still play the new games, so i like nvidia on that part. But there pricing and re-branding is just getting stupid, its like there is a global surplus of G92 chips somewhere that nvidia want to get rid off, and there price to performance ratio is way out, like intel's Q8200 compared to the athlon x4 620, its much more expensive and gives less performance and no future proofing to boot.

other than that, Nvidia cards are not bad, just wish they where a hole lot cheaper, this was my 2c. I also know that gpu's here are overprice (i think, dont want to do math now xD) but they should still be comparable to USA prices when it comes to the price/ performance ratio.

(resolutions i used when testing a few things was 1920x1080, and the more mainstream 1680x1050 but of course at the more mainstream res, the performance between many cards are not much, being that its a decent gpu)

 

[Guest]

Sorry for double post, but based on what i said at top, there is some Nvidia cards i would consider you change around for more affordable and better Radeon cards. Even though you claim (and most likely true) that the Radeon cards such as the 4850 are hard to find, they will be on sale again most likely. I hear this stuff all the time, such as they dont make DDR400 Ram anymore and i've heared that for like 2 years, yet they still on sale? And AGP cards are not made anymore, yet when they sold out, a month later they got again?

 

[Guest]

The hierarchy chart is nice. It's hard to judge how last year's high-end card compares to this year's mid-range card; this is very helpful.

I spotted what appears to be a misplaced entry, however: The HD 4350 and HD 4550 are shown in the same performance category even though the 4550 is much faster (it has twice the memory bandwidth). I had a 4350 in my HTPC originally; it scored 3.5 in Win7 Experience Index; I swapped it with a 4550 and it went up to 4.7.

My 4550 significantly outperformed my old 6600 (non-GT, 128-bit). Looking at the chart, I think the 4350 should be moved down a notch.

 

[dlpatague]

I agree that there are too many price points being added to this list. Keep it simple maybe every $50 or something. Also, if you must include both Nvidia products and ATI products on the list to be fair, why don't you create two separate lists one dedicated to Nvidia cards; Best Nvidia Cards For The Money, and another dedicated to ATI; Best ATI Video Cards For The Money? That way Nvidia fans can get their list while ATI fans can their list. The hierarchy chart is a little confusing because of different reasons, but I can see that you want to keep it simple with not too many tiers, which is fine. All-in-all I look forward to reading the Best Of... articles each month. Thanks.

 

[dlpatague]

I agree that there are too many price points being added to this list. Keep it simple maybe every $50 or something. Also, if you must include both Nvidia products and ATI products on the list to be fair, why don't you create two separate lists one dedicated to Nvidia cards; Best Nvidia Cards For The Money, and another dedicated to ATI; Best ATI Video Cards For The Money? That way Nvidia fans can get their list while ATI fans can their list. The hierarchy chart is a little confusing because of different reasons, but I can see that you want to keep it simple with not too many tiers, which is fine. All-in-all I look forward to reading the Best Of... articles each month. Thanks.

 

[Onus]

One list cuts through fanboi BS; I don't care who makes it, I just want to know the best card for the money. Let the fanbois moan.
A few less tiers on the chart wouldn't hurt, but really doesn't matter. New high-end cards will always need to go in new top tiers, pushing the others down.

 

[Guest]

All the Intel HD Graphics examples seem to have disappeared from the hierarchy chart - any reason?