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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why aren't the Intel integrated graphics updated on the chart (latest chip was HD 4000)? According to Steam Hardware & Software Survey: July 2014, almost one fifth of the world game on Intel HD!
 
I'm confused why Amazon is listed way above the recommend price. The R9 290, for example, is listed as a best buy at $390, then we have Amazon listed at $430. Amazon is the worst place, because they always make you pay tax, whereas other sites often times do not. Plus, I can get this card for $380 at Newegg, with only the slightest amount of effort.

This is just one example, there are others where the price listed is significantly different, from Amazon, than the price it won at.

It's a disservice to steer users to Amazon if they charge $40 more, plus possibly additional taxes. Why not just list the lowest cost one (if you don't want to pick a lousy version of the card, put one you think offers the best bang for the buck, or rotate them if there are several, and list the lowest cost for it, from the pooled sites)?
 
Why aren't the Intel integrated graphics updated on the chart (latest chip was HD 4000)? According to Steam Hardware & Software Survey: July 2014, almost one fifth of the world game on Intel HD!
Click to expand...
It's not really that much of a loss; none of the Kaveri-based iGPUs are listed here either. For the 4600, I'd just pop up a single tier. Not sure with the 5000 series, perhaps HD 3850 512MB level, tops, for the 5200?
 
I'm confused why Amazon is listed way above the recommend price. The R9 290, for example, is listed as a best buy at $390, then we have Amazon listed at $430. Amazon is the worst place, because they always make you pay tax, whereas other sites often times do not. Plus, I can get this card for $380 at Newegg, with only the slightest amount of effort.

This is just one example, there are others where the price listed is significantly different, from Amazon, than the price it won at.

It's a disservice to steer users to Amazon if they charge $40 more, plus possibly additional taxes. Why not just list the lowest cost one (if you don't want to pick a lousy version of the card, put one you think offers the best bang for the buck, or rotate them if there are several, and list the lowest cost for it, from the pooled sites)?
Click to expand...
Amazon charging tax is going to depend on where you live. I believe, state side at least, there are 19 states that Amazon is required by law to collect tax in. If you live in one of those.... bummer, but, for instance in my state, there is no tax.

I agree about the quality and choice of cards though. It would be nice to list not just the cheapest version, but one that doesn't have half the reviews on Newegg complaining of DOA RMA stuff. Also, with the midrange/older cards that have OC versions, that can be a big factor. Why recommend (purely an example not based on benchmarks) an R9 280, when there is an R9 270x OC for 40 dollars less with nearly identical numbers?
 
the gtx 780 costs but as much as the r9 290x or less I think it should be mentioned and has better drivers and run cooler.
 
the gtx 780 costs but as much as the r9 290x or less I think it should be mentioned and has better drivers and run cooler.
Click to expand...
Yeah but performance wise it's only really as good as the r9 290, which is 100 dollars less. That's probably the reason it's not in this "Best Graphics Cards for the Money" review. Also, the people who want the nvidia drivers/features probably won't put too much stock in the lack of recommendation. I feel GTX 770 would've also been deserving an honorable mention as it's slightly better than the 280x for 30 to 40 dollars more, but I understand why it was left out.
 
Why aren't the Intel integrated graphics updated on the chart (latest chip was HD 4000)? According to Steam Hardware & Software Survey: July 2014, almost one fifth of the world game on Intel HD!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust the Steam statistics on that, I have a GTX 770 and the Steam software detects me as using HD 4000.... I can't be the only one it's detecting wrong 😛
 
Still have a couple of issues with your recommendations.

First, a quick search on Amazon reveals the 270X's are pretty much going for $200. I realize prices fluctuate often, and that I've also failed to account for other retailers, but in my opinion, the 270 (non X version) is consistently the better value. At stock, you're losing what...2 FPS in your average game? That can easily be made up with an overclock. So for me, I'd rather save the $20-30. Also, the 270 only requires 1 power connector, which would help to accommodate users with lower-end PSU's.

Furthermore, based on your own recommendations, 2 R9 270's should be equal to or greater than 2 GTX 660's, while costing the same or less (less if you're a smart shopper).

Anyway, great article otherwise. I always look forward to this every month. Thanks guys.
 
Nice article, but one thing that jumps out at me is the GTX 760 you listed for $340 on the last chart. Your off by about $100, they sell for $230 and up. It must be a misprint because in the article you price it at $240
 
Why is the NVidia GTX 750(non-ti) card not even mentioned in this article? The AMD 260X and NVidia GTX 750 are about the same price and the Tom's graphics benchmarks show that they trade punches depending on the game. The GTX 750 also uses almost half the power of the 260X.

The NVidia GTX 750 is also the best pick for upgrading an old underpowered system IMO. $40 cheaper than the 750ti and I'd bet that there isn't a noticable difference when using an older processor. So why no mention?



 
Why is the NVidia GTX 750(non-ti) card not even mentioned in this article? The AMD 260X and NVidia GTX 750 are about the same price and the Tom's graphics benchmarks show that they trade punches depending on the game. The GTX 750 also uses almost half the power of the 260X.

The NVidia GTX 750 is also the best pick for upgrading an old underpowered system IMO. $40 cheaper than the 750ti and I'd bet that there isn't a noticable difference when using an older processor. So why no mention?



 
@ta152h
I think the same thing when anyone mentions Microcenter. From what I've seen, if you live near one you can usually get about a $40 discount, but you end up paying $30 in taxes. Yet, most of the people posting here never mention the taxes.
 
Looking at the charts, the 265X and 270X are listed as having the same memory architecture, bandwidth, and clock. Why, then, does the 265X list a 25GB/s advantage?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom