16 replies to this topic

[Gun Bear]

Yeah I know, there are too many of these but they are all in their own way legit.

I'm running a 9500 GT right now, it performs really well but I don't know if it will be able to handle MW:O. Like many people here I'd buy a new card JUST to play the game. When I bought it in 2009 it was the best budget card there was available anywhere I could get too and it has never failed me before; running any PC game I wanted at least on medium settings. I never tried either Crisis game though and from what I understand The Crisis Engines can be taxing on a graphics card, coupled with the fact that mine is 3 years old and would essentially be 3025 tech going by B-Tech standards should I get a new card?

If so what are some good BUDGET cards (being $125 or less) that I could purchase that should be able to run MW:O decently.


Other relevant specs: 700 Watt power supply (currently drawing 550 on it)
4GB RAM (never needed more)
Processors come to 7.2 Ghz (not including the graphic cards own processors)
Windows Vista 64 Bit OS.


Any input would be appreciated.

Edited by Gun Bear, 28 April 2012 - 06:28 PM.

[Motionless]

Quote

should I get a new card?

You're probably going to want one, yeah. Even if your card is only 3 years old, the 8500 GT was launched 5 years ago and was a mid-range card THEN. If you wanted to try Crysis on it you'd probably need very low settings with your current card, and Crysis was released in 2007.

With that being said, it's more about the game than the engine. You can use Crytek to make a not super intensive game, but you can also create some crazy stuff that's very demanding hardware. Crysis Warhead with max ground clutter and enthusiast shaders and stuff. I wouldn't expect MWO to achieve any new heights in terms of graphics realism though probably wont be that taxing.

Quote

If so what are some good BUDGET cards (being $125 or less) that I could purchase that should be able to run MW:O decently.

the GTX 460 and 550 Ti are both around that price. I would expect these to do the job.

Quote

Processors come to 5.8 Ghz

wat

Edited by Motionless, 28 April 2012 - 06:24 PM.

[Mason Grimm]

Check HERE for performance and average cost.

http://www.videocard...h_end_gpus.html

I just went through this myself and picked the 560 Ti 440 core

[Vtack]

yes you poor thing... OH GOD! computer envy setting in... I meam, the ATI Radeon 5800 series is nice

[Gun Bear]

Motionless, on 28 April 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

wat

Sorry 7.2 Ghz, somehow I managed to typo that bad.

[Motionless]

Mason Grimm, on 28 April 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

Check HERE for performance and average cost.

http://www.videocard...h_end_gpus.html

I just went through this myself and picked the 560 Ti 440 core

It might be nice to have a list like this, and 560 Ti 448 is a very nice card, but many of these prices are inaccurate, some of them very inaccurate.

It might take longer, but for people I'd suggest shopping around. Sites like Amazon, Tigerdirect and Newegg for prices. Anandtech's benchmarks to see how they perform in games, their power usage, and you can even check their site for more in-depth reviews of cards.

[ChalybsUmbra]

Gun Bear, on 28 April 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

Sorry 7.2 Ghz, somehow I managed to typo that bad.

lolwut. Are you multiplying your CPU speeds by your number of cores? Doesn't work like that.

[Motionless]

Gun Bear, on 28 April 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

Sorry 7.2 Ghz, somehow I managed to typo that bad.

Are you taking the clock speed of each core and adding them together? It's not exactly the most... well it's not that useful

So, I suppose you have a 1.8GHz quad core or 2.4GHz Tri-core? Whatever it is (don't remember off the top of my head what procs those might be,) that with 4gigs of ram should probably be sufficient - meaning the video card should pretty much be your only worry methinks.

Modern video games tend to be very demanding on the video card, not so much on CPU -- not that a new CPU wouldn't be 'better.'

Edited by Motionless, 28 April 2012 - 06:37 PM.

[Gun Bear]

Quad Core 1.8, I've had it run at 5+ ghz before. I knew the 7.2 wasn't 100% accurate but there are so many dependencies that I just tossed up the maximum total.

[ChalybsUmbra]

Gun Bear, on 28 April 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

Quad Core 1.8, I've had it run at 5+ ghz before. I knew the 7.2 wasn't 100% accurate but there are so many dependencies that I just tossed up the maximum total.

Your sig is very appropriate. Anyways, your quad-core should be fine, and it sounds like it has turbo-boost, or some similar auto-overclocking capability. MWO shouldn't be that CPU-taxing.

[Motionless]

Gun Bear, on 28 April 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

Quad Core 1.8, I've had it run at 5+ ghz before. I knew the 7.2 wasn't 100% accurate but there are so many dependencies that I just tossed up the maximum total.

You could just mention what processor it is, it's more accurate to do that. Because two different procs can bother operate at the same frequency and one can still perform better. In windows, the only way I know how to find it, is to open your device manager and look for 'processors' in the list.

Try holding the 'windows key' and pressing R to bring up the run menu, and then enter in 'devmgmt.msc' press enter and check the proc.

[SGT Unther]

I would wait for the GTX600 series to fully materialize that will then force a price drop on the GTX500 series and even maybe the Radeon 6000 and 7000 series.

I would wait on the new series of cards to let their drivers mature.

[Motionless]

SGT Unther, on 28 April 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

I would wait for the GTX600 series to fully materialize that will then force a price drop on the GTX500 series and even maybe the Radeon 6000 and 7000 series.

I would wait on the new series of cards to let their drivers mature.

True, you don't need to buy yet. You could wait to order until you're able to sign up for closed beta, or wait till open beta (or release.)

[Vulpesveritas]

This is the fastest graphics card you can get around your price range: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814161402 Other than that, your next best option is this; http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814102985 but for the extra $15, you'll have a much faster card than the Radeon HD 7750 or Nvidia GTX 550ti (which are within +/- 5% of each other's performance overall, but the 7750 is slightly cheaper, runs cooler, and uses less power.)

[Gun Bear]

ChalybsUmbra, on 28 April 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

Your sig is very appropriate. Anyways, your quad-core should be fine, and it sounds like it has turbo-boost, or some similar auto-overclocking capability. MWO shouldn't be that CPU-taxing.

25% of the time I'm wrong or confused
25% of the time I'm In character
25% of the time I'm messing around
25% of the time I'm actually right
I tried to make a sig that explains that.

[Catamount]

Gun Bear, on 29 April 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

25% of the time I'm wrong or confused
25% of the time I'm In character
25% of the time I'm messing around
25% of the time I'm actually right
I tried to make a sig that explains that.

So you're right 100% of the time... 25% of the time

Anyways, Vulpes has it right. Right now, the best budget GPU is the 7770. There are cheaper GPUs, but the small extra cost over those buys a very nice jump in performance. It's basically a cheaper 6850 in most games.

Will that change when more Geforce 600 series cards come out? To be honest, given Nvidia's nonexistent numbers shipping, and the fact that there have already been price drops on AMD's lineup in response to the 680, I doubt the 600 series will change much. The price war already took place; the readjustment has already occurred, and despite imbalance between them (AMD still outstrips Nvidia handily in performance/price, in terms of real-world pricing for tangibly available products), that price war isn't continuing.

[SGT Unther]

Catamount, on 29 April 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

So you're right 100% of the time... 25% of the time

Anyways, Vulpes has it right. Right now, the best budget GPU is the 7770. There are cheaper GPUs, but the small extra cost over those buys a very nice jump in performance. It's basically a cheaper 6850 in most games.

Will that change when more Geforce 600 series cards come out? To be honest, given Nvidia's nonexistent numbers shipping, and the fact that there have already been price drops on AMD's lineup in response to the 680, I doubt the 600 series will change much. The price war already took place; the readjustment has already occurred, and despite imbalance between them (AMD still outstrips Nvidia handily in performance/price, in terms of real-world pricing for tangibly available products), that price war isn't continuing.

You may be right about that, but there still is no need to rush out and buy a card for a game we don't even system requirements for yet or let alone an open beta date or release date. Just sit back and wait, it is very likely the card you want will go on sale or have a rebate between now and launch.