Best Graphics Cards For The Money: January 2012 (Archive)

[vertexx]

Here is what I'm looking at:

R9 270x vs. GTX760: GTX760 is 20-25% more expensive but only has ~8-10% faster performance, so R9 270x wins in value.
R9280x vs GTX770: About the same price now and GTX770 is ~8-10% faster, so GTX770 still wins in value.
R9 290x vs GTX 780ti: 780ti is 27% more expensive but only has ~10% faster performance, arguably about even at higher resolutions. So R9 290x wins in value.

IMO the 760 is definitely no longer a "mid-range value leader" now that AMD pricing has come back down to Earth. For the high-end cards, you have all 4 cards listed. IMO, the R9 290X is clearly the best GPU for the $$, within striking distance of the 780ti for significantly less $$.

 

[thisnamehasalreadybeentaken]

Here is what I'm looking at:

R9 270x vs. GTX760: GTX760 is 20-25% more expensive but only has ~8-10% faster performance, so R9 270x wins in value.
R9280x vs GTX770: About the same price now and GTX770 is ~8-10% faster, so GTX770 still wins in value.
R9 290x vs GTX 780ti: 780ti is 27% more expensive but only has ~10% faster performance, arguably about even at higher resolutions. So R9 290x wins in value.

IMO the 760 is definitely no longer a "mid-range value leader" now that AMD pricing has come back down to Earth. For the high-end cards, you have all 4 cards listed. IMO, the R9 290X is clearly the best GPU for the $$, within striking distance of the 780ti for significantly less $$.

i think you are wrong about the gtx 770,r9 280x comparison
they both have nearly the same fps
but in terms of value and long time useability(384 bit,3gb vram) i think r9 280x would be better
i am just suggesting please don't kill me

 

[hixbot]

Because Integrated graphics is VERY much bound to the platform it running on. RAM specs especially.

So what? Test it with a best case, we're talking about Intel on-die graphics here, just combine it with fast RAM and bench.

You cannot upgrade to or from the Intel Iris Pro 5200 or 5000. They are for All-in-one built in PC solutions. It doesn't make sense to put them in a chart to advise you of a viable upgrade for graphics. The performance of the Iris Pro integrated graphics solution is also dependent on the power envelope of the system it's in. In addition to thermal limitations. Those graphic solutions have no place on this chart. It has been said many , many times before already.

You absolutely can upgrade FROM an IGP. Adding it the charts provides a good baseline for people who have a PC with intel IGP who are thinking about adding a discrete card, or building a new system. It is also good information for those who are thinking about buying a PC with IGP and are familiar with discrete card performance. Also just good information in general for readers who just want to know how Intel stacks up, and how far they have to go.

 

[RedJaron]

So what? Test it with a best case, we're talking about Intel on-die graphics here, just combine it with fast RAM and bench.

Since the main conclusion here is performance / money, how would you calculate the money for just the IGP components of such a system? How do you calculate the money for just the IGP side of the CPU? ( because you still need to have a CPU to run a system with a discrete GPU. ) Then you need to add in the cost of faster RAM over normal 1600 sticks. And would you need to include any of the mboard cost? I mean, you'll want a better mboard to OC the RAM correctly.

So no, you can't normalize the cost of the IGP in regards to a discrete GPU, so you can't include them on a value list. If you want to give a generic idea of pure performance against the GPUs, that's a different story.

 

[anthony8989]

Because Integrated graphics is VERY much bound to the platform it running on. RAM specs especially.

So what? Test it with a best case, we're talking about Intel on-die graphics here, just combine it with fast RAM and bench.

You cannot upgrade to or from the Intel Iris Pro 5200 or 5000. They are for All-in-one built in PC solutions. It doesn't make sense to put them in a chart to advise you of a viable upgrade for graphics. The performance of the Iris Pro integrated graphics solution is also dependent on the power envelope of the system it's in. In addition to thermal limitations. Those graphic solutions have no place on this chart. It has been said many , many times before already.

You absolutely can upgrade FROM an IGP. Adding it the charts provides a good baseline for people who have a PC with intel IGP who are thinking about adding a discrete card, or building a new system. It is also good information for those who are thinking about buying a PC with IGP and are familiar with discrete card performance. Also just good information in general for readers who just want to know how Intel stacks up, and how far they have to go.

If you have Intel Iris Pro 5200 or 5000 graphics and you want to upgrade your graphics solution - you have to buy a new computer. It is built in to the the All-in-one PC's and Mac Book type units. Unless you are an expert at assembling PC's and re-soldering hardware, you absolutely cannot upgrade to or from an Iris Pro without buying a new PC. Otherwise you're building a rig with a FCBGA1364 socketed motherboard.

 

[thisnamehasalreadybeentaken]

can someone help me
so which one to consider r9 280x or gtx 770
spoilt for choice a LOT
(just gaming only fps matters)

 

[hytecgowthaman]

again my config wins this month.
amd fx 6300 , sapphire 7770 , seagate 2tb hdd 6gbps, gigabyte 970 mobo , 2gb x2 @ 1600mhz.
another config asus 88 mobo , amd 6600k apu ...

 

[hytecgowthaman]

can someone help me
so which one to consider r9 280x or gtx 770
spoilt for choice a LOT
(just gaming only fps matters)

hd 7990

 

[Memnarchon]

can someone help me
so which one to consider r9 280x or gtx 770
spoilt for choice a LOT
(just gaming only fps matters)

They have the same performance.
Just pick the cheapest one.
Or pick the non-reference version you like.
You can't go wrong here...

 

[verma1891]

Here is what I'm looking at:

R9 270x vs. GTX760: GTX760 is 20-25% more expensive but only has ~8-10% faster performance, so R9 270x wins in value.
R9280x vs GTX770: About the same price now and GTX770 is ~8-10% faster, so GTX770 still wins in value.
R9 290x vs GTX 780ti: 780ti is 27% more expensive but only has ~10% faster performance, arguably about even at higher resolutions. So R9 290x wins in value.

IMO the 760 is definitely no longer a "mid-range value leader" now that AMD pricing has come back down to Earth. For the high-end cards, you have all 4 cards listed. IMO, the R9 290X is clearly the best GPU for the $$, within striking distance of the 780ti for significantly less $$.

i think you are wrong about the gtx 770,r9 280x comparison
they both have nearly the same fps
but in terms of value and long time useability(384 bit,3gb vram) i think r9 280x would be better
i am just suggesting please don't kill me

can someone help me
so which one to consider r9 280x or gtx 770
spoilt for choice a LOT
(just gaming only fps matters)

Just go with the cheaper one.

 

[vertexx]

can someone help me
so which one to consider r9 280x or gtx 770
spoilt for choice a LOT
(just gaming only fps matters)

They're very close. GTX 770 is slightly faster (<10% on average at 1080p/max settings) and consumes slightly less power (depending on the actual model). R9 280X has more memory (3GB vs. 2GB) and so is slightly better future proofed (of course you can get a 4GB GTX 770, but you'll pay more $$).

They do vary based on the games, so best bet is to Google some reviews out there and look at how they compare for the titles you most frequently play. Here's one (sorry - the Tom's 280x review failed to have a 770 for comparison) http://www.anandtech.com/show/7400/the-radeon-r9-280x-review-feat-asus-xfx - but there are others out there as well.

Also, you can get some good advice by searching the forums (i.e you're not the first to ask this question) or even re-posting your question with a little more background on your current system and gaming requirements here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/forum-31.html

 

[Wisecracker]

There seems to be an on-going price war between the R9 280X and the GTX770 over the last month. Thank goodness.

The longer you hold out -- the better.

 

[thisnamehasalreadybeentaken]

wow so many responses thank you
i am going to play on 1080p
wont the extra vram or extra bit help in future gaming performance(even on 1080 p)

currently 2 gb is more than enough but already some games have started 'recommending' 3 gb vram
so what do you think

@hytecgowthaman no offense but that gpu is 2.5 times my choice so no .
thanks anyway

 

[Isaiah4110]

wow so many responses thank you
i am going to play on 1080p
wont the extra vram or extra bit help in future gaming performance(even on 1080 p)

currently 2 gb is more than enough but already some games have started 'recommending' 3 gb vram
so what do you think

@hytecgowthaman no offense but that gpu is 2.5 times my choice so no .
thanks anyway

All the reviews I have seen indicate that, at 1080p, the texture packs are not yet intense enough to necessitate more than 2GB of VRAM. That said, if you are hoping this card will last you more than just a couple years of maxing out games at 1080p, or if you plan on upgrading to a higher resolution in the near future, then I could definitely see either the 4 GB version of the 770 or the 3GB of VRAM and increased memory bandwidth of the 280X being beneficial for you. I haven't been a big fan of the way the AMD drivers have run the last times I have used them, but if it is within your budget then I would probably go with the 280X.

 

[hytecgowthaman]

http://www.flipkart.com/sapphire-amd-ati-r9-280-overclock-3-gb-ddr5-graphics-card/p/itmduxmhruhhewrg?pid=GRCDUXMHBHTJ3AAH&cmpid=content_graphics-card_8965229628_gmc_pla&tgi=sem,1,G,9226359,g,search,,25649953100,1o1,,,c,,,,,,,&gclid=CPbr4Y756b0CFcaXvQodNXgAtQ

 

[thisnamehasalreadybeentaken]

600 w enough for this gpu and i5 4570?

 

[hytecgowthaman]

600 w enough for this gpu and i5 4570?

enough

 

[17seconds]

600 w enough for this gpu and i5 4570?

Here is Guru3D's power supply recommendation:
•AMD R9-295x2 - On your average system the card requires you to have a 850~1000 Watt power supply unit.
•AMD R9-290x2 Crossfire - On your average system the cards require you to have a 1250 or higher Watt power supply unit as minimum.

If you are going to overclock GPU or processor, then we do recommend you purchase something with some more stamina.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_295x2_review,12.html

 

[thisnamehasalreadybeentaken]

600 w enough for this gpu and i5 4570?

Here is Guru3D's power supply recommendation:
•AMD R9-295x2 - On your average system the card requires you to have a 850~1000 Watt power supply unit.
•AMD R9-290x2 Crossfire - On your average system the cards require you to have a 1250 or higher Watt power supply unit as minimum.

If you are going to overclock GPU or processor, then we do recommend you purchase something with some more stamina.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_295x2_review,12.html

thank you but if you read the earlier posts/comments you would notice i am talking about r9 280x
not r9 295x2
must be some misunderstanding

 

[Wisecracker]

Price after rebate on the R9 280X dropped another $20 --- many of the cards now come with the "Gold Reward" 3-game bundle.

 

[JonnyDough]

Shouldn't the R7 250X and the HD 7770 be in the same tier since they are the same card? You even made note of it in your article. But the R7 260 is in the same tier as the R7 250 instead...

 

[Sakkura]

Shouldn't the R7 250X and the HD 7770 be in the same tier since they are the same card? You even made note of it in your article. But the R7 260 is in the same tier as the R7 250 instead...

The R7 250X is not in the chart at all. The R7 250 is, but that's a very different card from the 250X. The 250 is a rebadged 7730 (with higher clocks), the 250X is a rebadged 7770. That means the 250X has 640 shaders while the 250 has 384 - they obviously belong in different tiers. The 250X should naturally drop into the same spot as the 7770 when they add it to the chart. The 260 is also in that same tier, but that isn't unreasonable. It has 768 shaders, so it's in between the 7770 and 7790.

 

[Nevinvv]

im asking about the r7 graphics in amd 10 7850k...r7 250 or 250X...and wat about 4th gen intel hd graphics??

 

[hole head]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-performance.html seems to be missing. I wager that the price vs performance chart I can't find is in there.

 

[Someone Somewhere]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-performance.html seems to be missing. I wager that the price vs performance chart I can't find is in there.

Something went wrong in your link.

The correct link is:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-8.html