1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Suggestions for an ati card

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by OCQuadNick, Jan 4, 2008.

  1. OCQuadNick New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Messages:
    91 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    I am planning on spending 100 to 140 dollars on a video card that can be over clocked decently with is stock fan ive been looking around on newegg and looking through all of their ati crd in that range i need some tips for a card in that range =].im upgrading from a BFG 7800gt
  2. -=CrAnSwIcK=- New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    74 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    save your money and get something better....in the 200$ range you'll find alot more bang for your buck...
    OCQuadNick says thanks.
  3. sneekypeet

    sneekypeet Unpaid Babysitter Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    21,482 (7.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,995
    Id say to save up just a little on the cash and look at the HD3850 if you want price/performance at its best IMHO!
    OCQuadNick says thanks.
  4. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    If you can save up get a HD 3850 they will DESTROY anything in the 100$ range. They are around 160-170$.

    If you MUST get a 100-120$ card get a HD 2600XT 512mb, preferably the GDDR4 ones if you can find one for 120$.
    OCQuadNick says thanks.
  5. OCQuadNick New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Messages:
    91 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    will save

    Thanks guys :) ill save for a 3800 series card
  6. -=CrAnSwIcK=- New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    74 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    my 3850 scores 9500 in 3Dmark06 @ 760/1044...it's worth the extra 50 bucks...
  7. reverze

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368 (0.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    131
    Figured i'd support the 3850 cause and say yes, wait and get one.. no dissapointments will be in your near future :D
  8. Graogrim New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    308 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    East Coast US
    There are exactly 2 video cards that I'm currently recommending. One of them is the Radeon HD3850. I got mine for $159 and I've seen it available for as little as $143. The other is the Geforce 8800 GT, which is shown on websites for as little as $210 but is more realistically available for around $250.

    Both are great cards--easily the best in their respective price ranges. Both represent excellent value for the money.
  9. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    I would buy a 512mb HD 3850 with 200$. From what I have seen the 8800GT 256mb is a failure even at lower resolutions.
  10. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,088 (5.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,513
    Location:
    Florida
    not a flame thread. but to be fair the 3850 will destroty your 7800 is closer to your price range and will last you a reasonable amount of time.
  11. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    it has to be the 3850. king of its segment.
  12. Graogrim New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    308 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    East Coast US
    To be honest I'm not quite sure what you mean by "failure". I'm assuming your beef is with 256MB memory capacity. The 8800GT has terrific performance in either the 256 or 512 MB varieties, and the $250 I quoted will fetch a 512mb board anyway.

    Besides, it takes infrequently used combinations of extremely high resolution, supersampling, and texture usage to make a difference. More people choose higher framerates over antialiasing, so in more common usage scenarios 512MB doesn't appear to offer much benefit at the moment.
  13. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
  14. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,253 (11.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,585
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Nyaah! just spend $169 on a new Radeon HD2900 Pro 512M. You power-supply can handle this well. Flash it with the XT BIOS from our collection and be amazed at what you got for $169!
    OCQuadNick says thanks.
  15. Graogrim New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    308 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    East Coast US
    Understand that in the benchmarks you've linked the 8800GT is only being beaten by Crossfired *pairs* of Radeons. Crossfire is to ATI what SLI is to Nvidia. If you look farther down the list you'll see where single Radeons place.
  16. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    quite simply put, no 8800 card yet has been a failure all, all that 256 meg will do is restrict how much AA and res you can slap on, and maybe the odd game denying you max details.

    yes 256 meg hurts, but itll hurt jsut as much on a 256 meg 3850, but the 3850 512 and 8800gt 512 are half a world apart.

    also keep in mind the memory on the 8800GT is at 1800mhz for 512 and 1400mhz for 256, which definatly accounts for the speed drop

    in any case a 3850 of any brand/memory configuration WILL make you happy imo.
  17. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    oh:banghead: reading ftw
  18. Graogrim New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    308 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    East Coast US
    Believe me, as a 3850 owner myself I'd love for those crossfire numbers to be single card results. :toast:
  19. Darkmag

    Darkmag New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    29 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17
    I think you read those graphs wrong so Ill put it in bold for you.

    S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 1600x1200 MAX

    3850 Crossfire= 106 FPS
    3850= 58 FPS
    8800GT 256mb = 37 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 97 FPS

    Call of Juarez
    3850 Crossfire= 41 FPS
    3850= 21 FPS
    8800GT 256mb = 18 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 26 FPS

    World in Conflict 1600x1200 DX10 MAX
    3850 Crossfire= NO CROSSFIRE
    3850= 19 FPS
    8800GT 256mb = 16 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 45 FPS

    ON DX9 and MED settings the 8800GT 256mb outperforms the 3850

    BioShock 1600x1200 MEDUIM
    3850 Crossfire= 72 FPS
    3850= 42 FPS
    8800GT 256mb =48 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 54 FPS

    CRYSIS 1600x1200 Meduim
    3850 Crossfire= 53 FPS
    3850= 33 FPS
    8800GT 256mb =40 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 44 FPS

    Call of Duty 4 1920x1200 4xAA
    3850 Crossfire= 44 FPS
    3850= 23 FPS
    8800GT 256mb =14 FPS
    8800GT 512mb = 34 FPS

    At 1280x1024 the 8800gt outperforms the 3850
  20. Ripper3

    Ripper3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,386 (0.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    London, England
    Not quite, I gave it a quick once over, and look at STALKER benchmark:
    [​IMG]
    Right at the bottom, the 3850, no mention of crossfire, is above the 256MB 8800GT.

    EDIT:
    Same thing happens in CoD4 at high res too:
    [​IMG]

    Anyhu, the 8800GT does still beat the 3850 in some benchmarks and games, but the important thing is, that the 3850 is available, it's cheap, and it works.

    Also, I don't believe the Bioshock benches, I can run the game at High details (only thing turned off is vSync and DX10, because I'm on XP), at 1680x1050, and it runs at about 40fps most of the time, so with medium details, it should run closer to 50 average on a 3850.

    EDIT #2:
    Bah, didn't see Darkmag's post, heheh
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2008
  21. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,253 (11.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,585
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    You can Google around for the reviews of 8800 GT 256M and see for yourself, it is better than a HD3850 anyday. Thanks for the charts, Ghost.

    The only issue with the 8800 GT 256M is its availibility.
  22. Xaser04

    Xaser04

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    734 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    100
    Whilst I can see that the HD3850 is quicker here this is a moot point as neither card is giving what I would call playable framerates.

    Also given that both cards are 256mb models wouldn't it be better to show results of them at lower resolutions (ie where both are actually giving playable framerates)

    These are from firingsquad

    Half life 2

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Fear

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Oblivion

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    COD 4

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Crysis (no AA)
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    They seem to show a mixed bag. In some games the 8800GT doesn't seem to be phased by its lack of memory when compared to the HD3850 however in others (noticably oblvion) the 8800GT is completely unplayable whereas the HD3850 is still offering a relatively playable experience.

    Please note I have only chose two resolutions from firingsquad as realistically you won't be gaming at above 1600x1200 on a card with only 256mb of vram.
  23. reverze

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368 (0.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    131
    I think those benchmarks pretty much conclude that they are at about the same level give or take a frame or two..

    except for that one benchmark..
    "Oblivion HDR 1600X1200X32 4xAA/16xAF"

    that is hideous!
  24. Graogrim New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    308 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    East Coast US
    Some of those benchmarks are so far out of line as to simply not make sense.

    So they're a mixed bag. I've tended to look at the generally more comprehensive benchmarks that FiringSquad provides. The picture they paint is of a card with generally higher performance, but that suffers from some driver issues. Perhaps texture streaming isn't working quite right on the G92 core, and the additional memory on the 512MB board is masking the issue. Unless it's the result of a hardware flaw I'd expect a ForceWare update will fix it, or at least mitigate it enough to make the card functional.
  25. AddSub

    AddSub

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,001 (0.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    For $160, a 2900Pro with 512MB of VRAM and 512bit bus is an excellent deal. They can be overclocked to XT speeds with relative ease.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page