GPU recommendations

[PewPewBangBang]

pew pew left out the 5770 card that less than his two choises but out performs both of them and at neweggs.com only costs $169 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102858

Yea 5770 is nice but it doesn't outperform a GTX 275 and its about on par with a GTX 260 probably faster once you overclock that thing.

The 5770 is technically better than a 4890 but i think the 128-bit is holding it back a lot compared to the 256-bit on the 4890, thats why its slower.

 

[shadows5631]

The specs show the 5770 and 4890 are almost exactly the same.

The only difference is the memory bandwidth, 125 on the 4890 and 76 on the 5770. And that's obviously from the memory bus being smaller. Also, the 5770 uses 90 watts less than a 4890.

 

[AreKiller]

Im running a GTX 260 and it runs just slightly less performance wise as my bro in laws GTX 280 and is about 60% cheaper in price tag.

 

[PewPewBangBang]

The specs show the 5770 and 4890 are almost exactly the same.

The only difference is the memory bandwidth, 125 on the 4890 and 76 on the 5770. And that's obviously from the memory bus being smaller. Also, the 5770 uses 90 watts less than a 4890.

The 5770 has faster clock speeds too i think......o wait maybe not i compared to wrong thing. It might have faster memory speed tho but yea the 128bit holds it back alot.

 

[shadows5631]

Yeah the memory clock is 500mhz more but the core is the same at 850.

The 128 bit isn't actually that bad. It's 64x2 instead of how ATI used to have cards which were 32x4. The 4890 however, is 64x4 so it's alot better quality than a 4870 and more bits than a 5770 obviously.

But both the 5770 and 4890 have the same number of Texture Units, Rasters, Texture Fill Rate, and Pixel Fill Rate (because they have the same core clock which affects the last 2)

Overall, the 4890 is better in performance but the 5770 is the better buy.


Also just wanted to point out that the 5770 reminds me of an 8800gt because it's almost the same size and uses the exact amount of power, but of course is loads faster.

 

[Shuppa]

Most movies run at 24-25FPS, at 30fps, granted no processing bottlenecks or lag you wont notice a difference in fluidity of motion in your games. Most games on consoles run 30-60 FPS, you don't need anything past 60FPS to be perfectly honest.

I can guarantee you'll notice a difference between 60 and 150 fps if you play a FPS game online. That's why most FPS players that are really good, or at least the few ones I had the oportunity to play with/against ,rather have higher fps then anything else so they always set the details on low and try to get rid of all excessive "shineh shineh" effects, which helps them boost FPSs in-game.

What you said may very well be true...if you still live in the 90s...but recent discoveries/studies suggest that your eyes don't have limitation in perceiving fps.

Here's the link to a nice and really underastandable article explaining this very thing, you may want to check it out:

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

 

[Kevimaster]

Psshh, you guys, I'm rocking all my games on max to near max and with 60fps on my $30 Nvidia 9500 GT Works like a charm and was ultra cheap. I'm getting a 275 soon though, with my new computer, so I can continue rocking on high graphic settings for several years to come

 

[sean1197]

i would say 5850 hands down if you can find one in stock they are amazing i have a 5870 but the 5850 is like 80 percent of this card whcih would = to about a stock clocked 285