Jump to content

Which video card is better?


Recommended Posts

Well? Like you saw in the title, which video card is better? NVidia GeForce 9600 512MB or ATI Radeon HD 4650 512MB? I have the ATI Radeon 3450 256MB and I want to run the game on a resolution that is HIGHER than 848x480. barf8bd.gif

 

My specs are:

 

3GB RAM

Intel Core2 Duo processor @ 2.6GHz

ATI Radeon 3450 256MB

Windows 7 Home Premium x64

 

Also, my computer is a Dell Inspiron 537s.

Link to comment
https://gtaforums.com/topic/435327-which-video-card-is-better/
Share on other sites

supermortalhuman

the 4650 is better than the 9600, but they are comparable either way. Both are significantly more powerful than the low end 3450, but all three suck and are a waste of money to buy in late 2009... Don't waste your money, they will NOT do much better than what you have...

 

I switched from HD 3850 to GTS 250 and I will NEVER buy another ATi product again - NEVER. Because they suck. For what it's worth.

 

My 3850 was AWESOME - compared to the mx440 and fx5200 it replaced... But it came with SO MANY issues, sh*tty drivers, crappy boot sequence with blackouts and sh*t - my card was 100% working - "that's normal", it turns out. Yea, well, that may be normal, but it's not Solid - Nvidia is Solid - go with the 9800 OR BETTER - do not waste your money on a 4650 or a 9600. I have friends with the 9600 and their performance isn't good enough, it's mediocre.

 

IF you MUST get an ATI card, know that 3850 is better than 4650 in actual using it, and that I wouldn't touch either of them, nor the 3850 I still own and only used for 1 month or so unless my nvidia card died and I had no other choice.

 

If you MUST get an ATi card, get 3800 or better, or 4800 or better, do not buy anything x700 series or less... x850 and higher ONLY. Other cards are not worth.

 

I got GTS 250 with 1GB for probably not much more expensive than the 9600, get something with a gig of ram, get something HIGHER than those cards, you will be happy wink.gif

Edited by supermortalhuman
Well? Like you saw in the title, which video card is better? NVidia GeForce 9600 512MB or ATI Radeon HD 4650 512MB? I have the ATI Radeon 3450 256MB and I want to run the game on a resolution that is HIGHER than 848x480. barf8bd.gif

 

My specs are:

 

3GB RAM

Intel Core2 Duo processor @ 2.6GHz

ATI Radeon 3450 256MB

Windows 7 Home Premium x64

 

Also, my computer is a Dell Inspiron 537s.

I Have a 9600 1GB and it runs full screen all settings are highest and high i get 30fps from time to time what kinda CPU do u have?

ExitiumMachina

Either or really, 9600GT slightly more powerful depending on what you do with your PC. Why not pop in a bit more cash and get the 9800GT? By far a better card and it holds water to a lot of todays games. I had a 9800GT 1GB card before I boughty my BFG 260 H2OC...honestly, the 9800 was a damn good card for the price.

supermortalhuman

yea, i have the 1gb GTS 250, it is a 9800GTX+ 1gb, just on a smaller process/cooler/less power - exact same card other than econimics and such tounge.gif very good card, WAY more powerful than x600, x800 that is - it is worth the extra bit.

supermortalhuman

 

How does this even relate to GTAIV?

I'm sure the only reason he needs to upgrade is for this game (Well, I assume, because he came to this forum and the IV section to ask). OC is right cause it is PC Performance Tips now, and he is asking for a tip tounge2.gif

 

true dat the links I guess.

Believe me if you want but I'm going to give you a "final answear".

 

I have a 9600 GT 512 GDDR3 ... few weeks ago I had problems with it and I had to send it back to the store, while at it they gave me a 4650 512MB ... in other words exactly the same specifications has the 9600. They even asked me if I wanted to keep it that way trading my "broken" GPU for that one.

 

All I can say is ATI was a huge disapointment. I wasnt't a fan of ATI for some years after having both. But after this I'll stay away from ATI forever (midrange GPU's at least).

 

The GTA4 I usualy run @ 1280, All tetures maxed out (except number of shadows) with the no restrictions activated (grafx used for like 1300+/480) but in benchmark i get 45.6 FPS even if the benchmark isn't that trustable I think it isn't far from that, I play the game like that no slwdowns, not even on rain or huge explosions and no mods.

 

With ATI was almost unplayable, and the worst happened when I tried Resident Evil 5, with 9600 I play in DX10 mode @1280x1024 all maxed out, frames in benchmark are around 56 and the game plays perfect, but with ATI, I had to use DX9 low graphics and was still unplayable, same for other games I have.

 

With ATI I couldn't even play an online game named Drift City without slowing down, and the grfx aren't that demanding, not even the painkiller demo I could play in lower settings without screen freezing.

 

When I had my 9600GT back all went back to normal , and I was surprised on the diference, maybe it's because of "the way it's meant to be play" or somthing, but ATI was a real nightmare, and no I don't work or get anything for saying good about NVIDIA, if you want to risk it do it, then you will know that I was talking serious.

 

And with my GT9600 I can play every current game maxed out, at 1280 (my max res), and I'm just thinking to trade it for a DX11 NVIDIA card when they are announced andare out).

 

Hope I helped...

Edited by S1LV3R_W0LF
lazloisdavrock

 

Believe me if you want but I'm going to give you a "final answear".

 

I have a 9600 GT 512 GDDR3 ... few weeks ago I had problems with it and I had to send it back to the store, while at it they gave me a 4650 512MB ... in other words exactly the same specifications has the 9600. They even asked me if I wanted to keep it that way trading my "broken" GPU for  that one.

 

All I can say is ATI was a huge disapointment. I wasnt't a fan of ATI for some years after having both. But after this I'll stay away from ATI forever (midrange GPU's at least).

 

The GTA4 I usualy run @ 1280, All tetures maxed out (except number of shadows) with the no restrictions activated (grafx used for like 1300+/480) but in benchmark i get 45.6 FPS even if the benchmark isn't that trustable I think it isn't far from that, I play the game like that no slwdowns, not even on rain or huge explosions and no mods.

 

With ATI was almost unplayable, and the worst happened when I tried Resident Evil 5, with 9600 I play in DX10 mode @1280x1024 all maxed out, frames in benchmark are around 56 and the game plays perfect, but with ATI, I had to use DX9 low graphics and was still unplayable, same for other games I have.

 

With ATI I couldn't even play an online game named Drift City without slowing down, and the grfx aren't that demanding, not even the painkiller demo I could play in lower settings without screen freezing.

 

When I had my 9600GT back all went back to normal , and I was surprised on the diference, maybe it's because of "the way it's meant to be play" or somthing, but ATI was a real nightmare, and no I don't work or get anything for saying good about NVIDIA, if you want to risk it do it, then you will know that I was talking serious.

 

And with my GT9600 I can play every current game maxed out, at 1280 (my max res), and I'm just thinking to trade it for a DX11 NVIDIA card when they are announced andare out).

 

Hope I helped...

a gt9600 maxing out Crysis and Dirt 2 at playable Frame Rates? at 720p?

I confirm what S1LV3R_W0LF is saying. The 9600GT is a pretty nice card... I'm amazed with it.

 

I run Crysis at 1024 x 1280, everything HIGH and AA 2x. I also run DiRT 2 everything HIGH (Windows XP, so that's DX 9) and AA to the maximum. The FPS are pretty stable and always above 30. My GTA IV runs nicely as well, even HIGH textures. biggrin.gif

 

When I ran the benchmark test of Resident Evil 5 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat, things didn't go so well (I couldn't max out both games), yet with almost maximum settings they ran pretty well on a 1/2 year old machine.

 

But hey, don't buy a 9600GT unless you really need a graphics card and don't have much money. It's not worth to buy it now in 2009 (almost 2010). But it was an excellent choice back in April 2008. Oh and btw, if the specs of both a Nvidia and ATI card are similar, I will buy the Nvidia one. Most games are more optimized for Nvidia than for ATI. smile.gif

Edited by Hydro_PT
lazloisdavrock

 

I confirm what S1LV3R_W0LF is saying. The 9600GT is a pretty nice card... I'm amazed with it.

 

I run Crysis at 1024 x 1280, everything HIGH and AA 2x. I also run DiRT 2 everything HIGH (Windows XP, so that's DX 9) and AA to the maximum. The FPS are pretty stable.

 

When I ran the benchmark test of Resident Evil 5 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat, things didn't go so well (I couldn't max out both games), yet with almost maximum settings they ran pretty well on a 1/2 year old machine.

yeah, that sounds better, with dx9.

@lazloisdavrock: I already played Crysis on Vista (DX 10) and yet my card performed very well. I just had to take AA off and reduce shadows to HIGH, everything else was at VERY HIGH and things ran pretty smooth. There isn't that much difference between one DirectX and the other. And for GTA IV that's irrelevant after all.

I didn't try Dirt 2 yet, can't afford it at moment.

 

Has for Resident Evil I can tell you I run it in DX 10 maxed out setting (textures, filters, shadows...) and my max Resolution is 1280x1024 ... for me it's MAX, my screen don't go over that. Also the "allmighty" Crysis I run it at 1280x1024 with all maxed out except for AA, I use x2 and not x4 in DX10 VISTA.

 

I have a Core 2 QUAD that isn't that special now, but thats how I run my games.

lazloisdavrock

 

I didn't try Dirt 2 yet, can't afford it at moment.

 

Has for Resident Evil I can tell you I run it in DX 10 maxed out setting (textures, filters, shadows...) and my max Resolution is 1280x1024 ... for me it's MAX, my screen don't go over that. Also the "allmighty" Crysis I run it at 1280x1024 with all maxed out except for AA, I use x2 and not x4 in DX10 VISTA.

 

I have a Core 2 QUAD that isn't that special now, but thats how I run my games.

nice, ill be getting a q9550 for christmas. gt9600 is a better older card than i thought.

corvettelover

a gt9600 maxing out Crysis and Dirt 2 at playable Frame Rates? at 720p?

um, not that hard to do, my computer maxes out DiRT 2 @ 1280x800 @ around 30 fps with some AA/AF....

 

AMD X2 64bit Dual Core 5200+

Vista 64bit Home Premium

BFG 9500GT 1GB OC Edition

5GB Ram

500GB HD

lazloisdavrock

 

a gt9600 maxing out Crysis and Dirt 2 at playable Frame Rates? at 720p?

um, not that hard to do, my computer maxes out DiRT 2 @ 1280x800 @ around 30 fps with some AA/AF....

 

AMD X2 64bit Dual Core 5200+

Vista 64bit Home Premium

BFG 9500GT 1GB OC Edition

5GB Ram

500GB HD

well yeah but 30 isn't really playable for me atleast. especially a racing game.

Edited by lazloisdavrock

 

LOL, I had the same disison to make, but i got the XFX Ati Radeon 4650. It runs well. THe issue i have only with gta 4 is my proccesser, dual core ain't enough.

 

P.S

 

I have i XFX ATI Radeon HD 4650 1 GB.

 

Dual Core IS good enough! My processor rating is 6.1! My lowest rating is that of my video card (4.0)

 

 

well yeah but 30 isn't really playable for me atleast. especially a racing game.

 

I'm not trying to be a asshole about it but the human eye can only see about 24 fps. biggrin.gif

Didn't bother to read through the thread but if someone is looking for a very budget friendly card that can still hold its own in a modern game, the 5750 is very cheap yet still able to play modern games on a mid range resolution without much trouble. Heck it even has the most up to date tech.

 

Anything less in this day and age is a waste of money as far as gaming goes.

 

Your are wrong. My eyes can tell the difference between 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 and 45 FPS.

 

I'm used to low fps. I've been using a Dell Dimension 3000 for years and played games like Battlestations Midway, Sims 3 and Halo 2. For me, 20 fps is extremely awesome. Now I have a new computer and I can play those games really well!

 

I just can't play GTA IV on reasonable settings.

Alright, let me point this out.

Im an owner of Mobile version 9600M GT 512MB.

It may too small for such chipset.

But dont underestimate this little f*cker.

It beat all gaames upon the asses.

Any game doesnt to be low setted.

GA4 runs smooth, niceley and no big slowdown.

Explosions doesnt make the game choppy.

I like the rocket launcer and uses it very hard.

I like to shot a big tiny bitch-ass rocket up the engine of a car.

Doesnt make the game lagg like a taking piss dog.

And f%$# the Quadcores.

My CPU is P8400 Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz, just 2 f*cking GHz.

So am I clear? tounge.gif

 

But like the other posters said, they perform the same.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 0 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 0 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.