my_plague_666 Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 hi folks. i've decided i've had it with the limitations of my current slimline case and i'm considering going all out and building my own gaming machine (or getting someone else to do it, if i feel lazy ) the dilemma i'm currently facing is which graphics card to use. i'm not particularly interested in ATI card and would rather focus on nvidia. the main cards i've been looking into are the GTS 250 (essentially the old 9800GTX+ with double the RAM) and the GTX 260 and 275. the thing is, i cant seem to find any reviews that seem to agree with each other. one review will show the GTX 260 falling short of even the old 9800GTX while another will show the GTX 260 dominating both the newer GTS 250 and the old 512mb 9800GTX. i'm only using a 19" widescreen monitor and havent really got space for anything bigger, so i wouldnt need to run at a ridiculous resolution. essentially i'd like this PC to run the games of today at their best and still have plenty of oomph for the future. another option i'd considered would be 2 GTS 250s in SLI mode. are there any inherent problems/issues with SLI and would a 750W PSU cover it? thanks in advance Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Don't get a GTS250, they are as you say, identical to the older 9800s which are in turn the same cards as the 8800gt. Basically nVidia is just milking the 8800gt core for all it's worth with that one. May I ask your reason for not being interested in Ati cards? They're much better value than nVidia at the moment. http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/1GB-XFX-HD-...x-DL-DVI-I-HDTV The 4890 is a hell of a card and it's only £140 now. I recently built a friends computer with a 4870 and a 2.5ghz pentium dual core (overclocked to 3.5) and it could run crysis smoothly at max settings @1366x768 so a 4890 will have no problems. The GTX 260 216 is a very good card, about equivalent to the 4870. Although it is more expensive. The GTX 275 is a little faster than the 4890 but it is around 40-50 more. Here are some useful linkages: 4890 vs 4870 vs 260 vs 285 vs 4870x2 Best cards for your money June '09 And yes there are problems with multiple graphics cards. If a game doesn't support SLI or Crossfire then you only have 1 slower card and with SLI you usually don't get near double the power, Crossfire seems to be more efficient lately. So you should always go for the most powerful single GPU that you can. Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 although nvidia are indeed milking the G92 core it IS still good GPU. and at about £100 a piece with 1GB of memory and obvious OC potential they still sound like a fairly good prospect, especially when an SLI setup would only be about £60 odd more than a single GTX260 i was shying away from ATI as, although they DO appear to be great value, i hear that finding drivers etc to get the most out of the card can be an awful lot of hassle. any comments on this? Link to post Share on other sites
jay bee Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 The 8800GT is fantastic value for the power. I stay away from ATI myself as I've found their performance to not really be up to par, though I do a lot of GPU programming which is my basis for a lot of my prejudice, so ATI cards may be ok for just gaming.. But still, I'd rather not take the chance with £140 Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 I myself use an 8800gt which I got nearly ago for £45 new. I was just browsing for an upgrade and I discovered that ebuyer had mis priced a lot of 8800s so I snapped one up I will admit, it's a good gpu but I do think the G92 is starting to show it's age a little, especially when compared to modern cards. As for the hassle, Automatic overclocking tool and stabilty tester for ATI cards and ATI Driver download page The most recent driver is 8 days old. The 4890 is an incredible overclocker, some people have managed to get the GPU to 1ghz and the GDDR5 memory to around 4.5ghz. Here is a guide and review on how to do it using a different overclocking program: Linky Link to post Share on other sites
LordElpus Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 i have a ATI HD4850 and it's been a great card. Cost about £120 from PC world. IF you are going to buy a ATI card, make sure it's made by Sapphire. The do some of the best budget ATi cards about. Link to post Share on other sites
Moriquende Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 The 8800GT is fantastic value for the power. I stay away from ATI myself as I've found their performance to not really be up to par, though I do a lot of GPU programming which is my basis for a lot of my prejudice, so ATI cards may be ok for just gaming.. But still, I'd rather not take the chance with £140 The only real problems with Ati are their *suitcase* drivers, but overall they make awesome cards. Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 i think i might have finally made a decision folks. i think a GTX 275 would suit me best. if ATI drivers are as much of a hassle as i hear, then i'd be happy to pay a premium for peace of mind. the 275 should take everything i throw at it in it's stride and i would imagine still last a good while before becoming totally outdated, even then i should have a bit of OC potential to play with (especially with aftermarket coolers) sounds like a safe bet, no? my only other question is, using vista 64bit, would 8GB of DDR2 RAM be a worthwhile investment? the extra 4GB would set me back another £40, but would it REALLY be worth it? Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 A GTX275 will be pretty nice, plenty of power. As for 8gb ram first you'd have to check on teh interforums whether you motherboard will be happy will all slots populated. Some are some aren't for some reason. But I don't really think it would be worth it performance wise. 4gb is more than enough for most games but then again, it is only £40 and you do get to say "I have 8gb ram, how much do you have?" Chances are you'll win on that front. Link to post Share on other sites
jay bee Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 The only real problems with Ati are their *suitcase* drivers, but overall they make awesome cards. Some of their cards aren't bad now they've caught up. Back in the days that Nvidia unveiled the GTX, ATI's range of DirectX10 capable cards were utter ######. Good thing for all of us that they're getting back in the game now, nothing fuels innovation like competition Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 4gb is more than enough for most games but then again, it is only £40 and you do get to say "I have 8gb ram, how much do you have?" Chances are you'll win on that front. thats pretty much how i was looking at it, then again said £40 is another £40 on top of the existing £750 odd that i've got to pull together, so maybe a bit of self control and a slightly smaller E-penis would be a good idea after all there's nothing stopping me plugging another couple of sticks in. Link to post Share on other sites
Moriquende Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Some of their cards aren't bad now they've caught up. Back in the days that Nvidia unveiled the GTX, ATI's range of DirectX10 capable cards were utter ######. Good thing for all of us that they're getting back in the game now, nothing fuels innovation like competition Never said there was anything wrong with their cards. Their drivers, however, have always been *suitcase*. Plague, Why not go all in and build yourself an i7 rig? Also, get yourself an EVGA card. Their clockability and Step-Up program is luvely. Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Plague, Why not go all in and build yourself an i7 rig? That is an incredibly good point. Don't bother with Core 2. It's rubbish compared to i7. Scrap a few more pounds together and get yourself an i7 system. http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Intel-i7-92...8MB-130W-Retail http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Asus-P6T-In...s-SATA-RAID-ATX http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/3GB-(3x1GB)...ed-CAS-9-9-9-24 Something like that. Link to post Share on other sites
Moriquende Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Looks good. Personally I would have gone with OCZ memory instead, though. Link to post Share on other sites
jay bee Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Never said there was anything wrong with their cards. Their drivers, however, have always been *suitcase*. Plague, Why not go all in and build yourself an i7 rig? Also, get yourself an EVGA card. Their clockability and Step-Up program is luvely. Oh yeah I know, that was just me begrudgingly admitting that their cards arent *that* bad any more. Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted June 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Plague, Why not go all in and build yourself an i7 rig? Also, get yourself an EVGA card. Their clockability and Step-Up program is luvely. lol, how i would love an i7 setup, but it's a bit out of my budget. i'm already going to have to work pretty hard to scrape together the funds for my planned setup. card wise i'll probably have what i'm given. i've decided i'll probably have dinopc.com build a PC to my spec. for overclocking i was planning on using the likes of N-tune and rivatuner. Link to post Share on other sites
p0inT Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 ATI driver got much much better, and nvidia drivers isnt much better either, and i will recommend ATI right now becase Nvida hasen´t come out with anything good and there HD4890 are kicking nivdia *albatross* plus in some games its performance better than GTX280, but if you only have a 19' screen a HD4770 or the HD4850 shold be enough! Link to post Share on other sites
Moriquende Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 ATI driver got much much better, and nvidia drivers isnt much better either Nvidia drivers arn't much better? Apart from beta drivers(which I always have problems with) they work everytime. Which is more than I can say about Ati drivers. and i will recommend ATI right now becase Nvida hasen´t come out with anything good and there HD4890 are kicking nivdia *albatross* plus in some games its performance better than GTX280 Saying that an Ati card performs better in certain games isn't exactly news. Ati cards has always been better in some games and the same applies to Nvidia. It usually has to do with what card/manufacturer the game was optimized for. but if you only have a 19' screen a HD4770 or the HD4850 shold be enough! Eh? Screen size suddenly matters? I thought it had to do with resolution. Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Eh? Screen size suddenly matters? I thought it had to do with resolution. Yes. 15" 4:3 = 1024x768 17/19" 4:3 = 1280x1024 20" 16:10 = 1680x1050 24" 16:10 = 1920x1200 24"+ 16:9 = 1920x1080 30" 16:10 = 2560x1600 Just off the top of my head but I think those are right. Link to post Share on other sites
Horsem4n Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 my laptop screen (17") supports resolutions up to 1920x1600. eh, i dont know what im talking about... Link to post Share on other sites
p0inT Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 Nvidia drivers arn't much better? Apart from beta drivers(which I always have problems with) they work everytime. Which is more than I can say about Ati drivers. I had a 8800GTS(320MB) before and everytime i used nvidia recommend drivers they nerver worked so i always need to unistall and then install old drives, And them i also had a few problems with. Saying that an Ati card performs better in certain games isn't exactly news. Ati cards has always been better in some games and the same applies to Nvidia. It usually has to do with what card/manufacturer the game was optimized for. Yeah that true, i will still pick a HD4890 for orther reason, but it dosent matter right now Eh? Screen size suddenly matters? I thought it had to do with resolution. You are right about screen sizes mattmanic it varies a littel bit but that about right! Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 24, 2009 Report Share Posted June 24, 2009 my laptop screen (17") supports resolutions up to 1920x1600. Laptops use different panels to desktop monitors usually, for some reason they tend to always be higher resolution. I used to have a 17" laptop with a 1920x1200 screen and it was awesome. I just wish they'd start making high res panels smaller in desktop form everything looks so much sharper and clearer on a decent laptop screen. Link to post Share on other sites
my_plague_666 Posted June 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 hey folks, got my spec sorted and was hoping for some comments Case: NZXT TEMPEST BLACK Mid Tower Case Power Supply Upgrade: 700 Watts Power Supplies (CyberPowerPC Performance ATX 2.0 Power - Quad SLI Ready) CPU: (Quad-Core)Intel® Core™ i7 920 @ 2.66GHz 8 MB cache LGA1366 ***Overclockable XXX*** Cooling Fan: INTEL LGA1366 CERTIFIED CPU FAN & HEATSINK Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD3R X58 2 Way Crossfire/SLI DDR3 Memory: 6GB (3x2GB) PC12800 DDR3/1600mhz Triple Channel Memory (OCZ Gold w/ HeatSpreader ***Overclockable XXX***) Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX275 896MB 16X PCI Express (Major Brand Power by NVIDIA) Hard Drive: Single Hard Drive (1TB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16M Cache 7200RPM Hard Drive) Optical Drive: (Special Price) LG 22X DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW DRIVE DUAL LAYER (Black Color) Sound: Asus Xonar DX 7.1 PCI-Express Sound Card Network: ONBOARD 10/100 NETWORK CARD a 700W PSU should cut it, right? also not sure whether to buy vista or make do with XP (which i can borrow from a friend) until win7 comes out. i'm a bit of a DX10 ######, and with a system like this i'd like to use it (and utilise the extra RAM) i know there was a project to allow DX10 to work with XP (project alky i believe), but it was abandoned. the alpha stage download is still available though. has anyone used/had any success with this? cheers Link to post Share on other sites
Moriquende Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Looks good. This part looks wrong though. Network: ONBOARD 10/100 NETWORK CARD Shouldn't it be 10/100/1000? Oh, and replace that ###### PSU with this: http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews.php?typ...20w_modular_psu Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Looks good, you might want to go with a Creative sound card though as they're more widely supported. 700w is great and will give you some headroom for overclocking/upgrading. But if you have the option to choose a better manufacturer go with them. If I were you I'd get that computer without an operating system and download Windows 7 RC1 and use that until Win 7 is actually released. I removed Vista and moved full time to Win 7 last month and so far it has been more stable, faster and less annoying than Vista has been. I had had Vista since launch and was glad to see the back of it tbh. Plus if you start using 7 now you'll be used to it when it actually comes out later this year. Here's a link to the download, you'll need the 64bit edition and don't forget to write down your product key. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/evalcen...x?ITPID=googles I recently built a computer for a friend and he had bought XP for it but we were having trouble getting it to work with his new hardware so I burnt a Win 7 disc and did a fresh install of that. Since then there's been no OS related problems at all. Edit: That motherboard does have gigabit lan btw, I don't know why they havn't said so... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.