Digg - The Top 5 Graphics Cards For Gaming

247 Comments
Who Dugg It?

no1joel, on 11/05/2008, -4/+26When I wanted to check out graphics cards for laptops, I used http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Graphic ...

Just in case anyone wanted a bigger list.
- chesterjosiah, on 11/06/2008, -8/+3Why would anyone even attempt to make such a list?
  
  This thing will be outdated in like 3 days.
  - benologist, on 11/06/2008, -1/+9They've been at it for a long time. Just because new chips come out doesn't mean old chips stop being sold in laptops either.
    
    I'm pretty sure users submit the benchmark scores and they average them as well, so it's probably mostly automated.
  - chesterjosiah, on 11/06/2008, -3/+1lol what? Certainly old chips stop being sold in laptops when newer chips come out.
    
    I was referring to the OP, not notebookcheck.net, when I said that these lists become outdated almost instantly. It just doesn't make sense to list the top 5 graphic cards for anything, plain and simple. Maybe an online document would work better, but a *page* for this is just stupid.
  - strictnein, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3If you were referring to the OP, then why did you respond to the post about a list of notebook graphics chipsets?
    
    And old chipsets are used in both desktops and laptops for quite a while.
  - AnthonyFTMFW, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0i have an ATI Radeon 9600xt in my AGP 8x slot on my 875 chipset.
    
    =(
- benologist, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3Their benchmark list rocks. The only thing I don't like about it is they really need two seperate search fields so you can do better comparisons.
- roctimo, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3I need a very tech-y person to help me out with this question: You know the smart card slots that are on the side of every Macbook Pro? Where you can put a Verizon Wireless internet card or what have you?
  
  Does an adapter exist that can connect a new graphics card to the Mac through that port? I've always wondered this, since the nVidia chip is soldered to the Macbook Pro's board and can't be replaced.
  - molochi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4The card slot you are referring to is an expresscard/34 slot. Expresscards come in 2 flavors 34mm wide and 54mm. They are low power, miniaturized, and esd protected versions of the (much larger) PCI-E x1 cards used in desktop computers.
    
    The following is copied from http://www.expresscard.org/web/site/qa.jsp#19
    
    3. Does a video accelerator ExpressCard module exist? Sound Card? How about a studio quality audio workstation?
    
    No, we do not expect that a stand-alone ExpressCard graphics accerlerator will be developed in the near term. Although the PCI Express x1 lane used in the ExpressCard interface is fast enough for substantial graphics acceleration, graphics accelerators currently require more board space than even an ExpressCard/54 module provides, more power than the ExpressCard slot can provide and produce more heat than an ExpressCard module can safely dissipate. We do expect to see ExpressCard modules which allow the addition of second (or even third or more) monitors to your system, although the level of graphics peformance on an external monitor will likely be best suited for office applications.
  - roctimo, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Thank you!
djmccormick, on 11/05/2008, -4/+24The USD amounts I got from Googling the conversion, not looking up the price in USA:

Asus Radeon HD4870 X2 £400 ($638.08 USD) www.asus.com
Sapphire HD4850 X2 £317 ($505.67 USD), www.sapphiretech.com
BFG GTX 280 H2OC £446 ($711.45 USD), www.bfgtechnologies.com
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 260 OC approx £220 ($350.94 USD), www.giga-byte.co.uk
HIS Radeon HD4850 IceQ 4 £131 ($208.97 USD), www.hisdigital.com
- lamiaconfitor, on 11/06/2008, -1/+9Gigabyte GeForce GTX 260 $300 @newegg.com
  
  Im not going down the whole list, but you can still shop around.
  - jvincent08, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4And I'm pretty sure there's a GTX 280 for around $500 or maybe even less. I wouldn't trust the prices listed in the article.
    
    Edit: Then again, the ones they listed were overclocked models.
- format, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1You can all those cards for a good bit cheaper, I've seen a GTX280 and 60 go for £240 and £180 respectively. Check out Scan.co.uk's today only offers, usually some decent deals there.
- L0NER, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1thanks
- boshuda, on 11/06/2008, -3/+1WIsh I could Digg this twice. My thanks!
- Harbinger67, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6I know it's tempting to just plug the pound amounts into a currency converter and call it a day, but it doesn't quite work that way. The 4870x2 is not $638. The card launched at $550, and has been holding there for weeks. I don't really understand the point of your comment if the prices are so obviously different even when the currency is converted to dollars.
- sexybobo, on 11/06/2008, -0/+5Asus Radeon HD4870 X2 $549.99
  Sapphire HD4850 X2 ? cant find any 4850 X2 for sale any where
  BFG GTX 280 H2OC $419
  Gigabyte GeForce GTX 260 OC $280
  HIS Radeon HD4850 IceQ 4 $169.99
  All Newegg prices.
- Elranzer, on 11/06/2008, -5/+1Buried for using Pound Sterling.
  
  Why are they even bothering to use Pounds? The UK is not the world, and the Pound Sterling is not the world currency. The majority of GPU customers are not in the UK. Plus the prices are inflated (unfairly) for the UK.
  - DragonForce4, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1are you retarded?
rowlodge, on 11/05/2008, -9/+14$100 range please.
- snoopydee, on 11/05/2008, -3/+20they might not be the best...
- tobikow, on 11/06/2008, -1/+8The HD4830 is a little closer to $100... and probably as low as you should go for a directx 10 capable card. excellent value with the 4800 series.
  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
- lamiaconfitor, on 11/06/2008, -2/+18then wait a year or so... seriously, I dont ever buy cards RIGHT when they come out.
  - RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -2/+8Unless you LIKE experimenting with drivers written at midnight before release.
  - norman619, on 11/06/2008, -0/+5I have to agree. Ilearned that lesson when I bought my 8800 GTX when it came out. I paid $600 to be nVidia's beta tester. It ws the one and only time nVidia ever let me down. Never agian. I made the mistake of giving away my old card w/o making sure the new one was good. I was unable to do anything that involved 3D graphics for alomst 5 months. I now wait till the 2nd or 3rd verion of drivers are released before thinking about buying a nextgen card.
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3Eh, I bought my 4850 within weeks of release. I had no major issues and no regrets.
    
    Sure, this sort of thing can be hit and miss, but I think a better rule is just to not spend more than a couple hundred dollars on graphics hardware to begin with. It's often superfluous. Most games I play don't even really push my card, so I don't really understand how people justify spending two or three times what I payed ($170) when it's unlikely to matter very much for some time.
    
    I guess if you have the money and want to spend it that's your choice to make, but it often seems like a pretty big waste to me when you realize that within two years that same card will cost less then half what you're going to pay.
  - dysfunction, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Same here, my 4850 has had no issues, and I bought it only a few weeks after they came out. I paid $170 for it, and it (with a Q6600 and 4GB@800) maxes Crysis at 1680x1050, at a respectable framerate (just shy of 30fps, but Crysis is quite smooth at even 25). And that's with nothing overclocked. The rig cost less than $700 total.
- RobotLeAwesome, on 11/06/2008, -3/+148800gt
  - theaverageidiot, on 11/06/2008, -1/+88800gts
  - Azuroth, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2but only the 512MB 8800gts, the 320 or 640 are the older kind.
  - purduecory, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3the 8800gt is faster than the 8800gts
  - lennybird, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1MSI Factory overclocked 8800GT 512mb runs crysis at 35fps for me at 1024x768 resolution (no AA) - everything else high. Looks great to me. Haven't tried it on higher resolutions (17" monitor...)
    
    Company of Heroes maxed.
    
    Really, it's not out of the ball game yet for those who play at lower resolutions; and for around $100, it's a steal.
  - Dubbsacc, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1@purduecory
    
    Only if the 8800 GT is a G92 version
  - TravisOwens, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0Actually the 9800GT is slightly faster than the 8800GT and can be easily found for $99 on a good sale/rebate. It also runs cooler, with it's 55nm core (the 8800GT is 65nm) which also means it uses less power.
  - AnthonyFTMFW, on 11/06/2008, -1/+0IGP FTW
- krazyman, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6For $100 check out the geforce 9800GT. I got one for $100, with free COD4 and it runs everything max, 1680x1050, except crysis can only run on high. :D
  - mickstephenson, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6Why is everything so cheap in America *sobs*
  - ifruit, on 11/06/2008, -13/+5Capitalism and low taxes, but that's about to change.
  - RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6Because it comes from China ?
  - norman619, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1How much ram is on the card? I'm having a hard time finding a reasonably priced 1GB gaming card. I pref nVidia. ATI has burned me every time I bought a product of theirs.
  - dullnation, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2That 1GB will be useless unless the GPU processor is fast enough anyway.
    
    (Plus most games still only use 512mb at most)
  - norman619, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3dull:
    
    I have games that do use larger texture sets.
  - norman619, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2ifruit:
    
    Don't forget that Obama is just President of the US not King or Lord. This means it doesn't matter what he wants it's still up to the other two branches of government to allow him to do what he wants. Checks and balances are great when they work. My concern is all the self-serving politicians in the house and senate who have sold their souls to special interests. Unless they change to constitution Obama and friends are severely limited in what they can do. Well that also depends on the judicial branch doing its job.
    
    I know this was WAY off topic but I felt compelled to answer the pore guy's concerns.
  - Elranzer, on 11/06/2008, -3/+1iFruit is just too used to Dubya acting like he WAS king or lord of the US. Good thing that most US citizens just started ignoring him around 2006.
  - dullnation, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1True but there are a lot of GPUs for sale that don't even take advantage of 1GB of RAM even though they cost extra. You see almost no advantage with 1GB on a 9600GT for example but companies throw it on there to try and pull you into paying the higher price for it.
- LocalDocal, on 11/06/2008, -0/+88800GT/9600GT.
  - Icetype, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2The 8800GT is MUCH faster than the 9600GT.
  - sharpie05, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1From experience? Personal experience puts them neck and neck. Do some research before posting.
  - RobotLeAwesome, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2it depends what 8800 you get
  - LocalDocal, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1@Icetype
    
    Actually, most benchmarks I looked at describe them as being extremely similar in performance (though the 8800GT does get a few extra fps on certain games). However, the 9600GT has an advantage in that it is much, much cheaper than the 8800GT.
- Sabretou, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3They won't "knock your socks off".
  - sexybobo, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1Yes but i have an 8800gt and i have yet to find a game (except crysis) which i can not play at full quality and still have 40-50 fps
- cdigioia, on 11/06/2008, -3/+5Why's he getting dug down? It's a valid question for a huge portion of casual to quazi-serious gamers.
  
  Personally, I have a laptop with an 8600M GT, and it's perfectly suits my needs...
- rondeth, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6I know everyone knows about Tom's Hardware, but what I recently noticed is that they periodically run a story called "The Best Video Cards for the Money [Date]" every few months.
  
  Here's the latest version: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Best-Graphics- ...
  
  They break it down into price points, usually a quick read. Cheers!
MakanGuru, on 11/05/2008, -5/+48the 4850 RAWKS and its so cost effective
- tobikow, on 11/06/2008, -0/+9totally agree, best value on the market now imo.
- DarkShroud, on 11/06/2008, -1/+8It uses a lot less energy than some of the nVidia cards as well.
- Hollow5, on 11/06/2008, -7/+2Would be a big mistake to buy the HD4850 or any of these cards when in only 6 month a new DX and shaders will be introduced.
  Right now the nvidia 9600GT and 8800GT will run anything and and will cost half of the HD4850. no need to waste your cash
  - nytral, on 11/06/2008, -1/+8Wrong, 8800GT is barely 20% cheaper and at that price, the HD4830 trounces it.
  - Hollow5, on 11/06/2008, -3/+2"the HD4830 trounces it"
    
    flawed theory
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3You get what you pay for.
- nytral, on 11/06/2008, -5/+2the HD4830 rocks even more: 20% cheaper, overlock as high as the 4850, memory as fast.. it makes me regretting buying the 4850 (the 4830 just got available now).
  - Hollow5, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1can you link to where the 4830 over run a 8800 ?
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4I guess if you're into disabled SIMDs that's fine, but "overclocking as high as the 4850" won't get you 4850 performance, just so you know.
  - molochi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1It overclocks as high as the 4850 overclocks? Or just to 4850 levels? Personally, I find mid range cards last for the couple of years that I use them and cards that you need to overclock just to get to midrange don't. YMMV
  - camg188, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0Hollow5: http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/
    The ATI cards perform better on the 3DMark06 tests, but the NVIDIA cards have better framerates on the game tests. I don't see the HD4830 on the charts but the HD4850 and the 8800GTX have very similar results.
  - camg188, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2A quick check at NewEgg.com shows that 4830 has 640 processing streams & core clock of 575 MHz while the 4850 has 800 processing streams & core clock of 625 MHz. I'm not sure how much that effects framerates but I would assume the 4830 would have to be overclocked well above 625 MHz to equal the performance of the 4850.
  - tatinthehat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2@ Hollow5
    
    http://techreport.com/articles.x/15752
    
    Their benchmarks show that the 4830 surpasses the 9800GT in some tests. Also remember, the 9800GT is simply for all intents and purposes a rebranded 8800GT.
  - nytral, on 11/07/2008, -0/+0in french but you get the idea with nice pictures:
    http://www.revioo.com/articles/a12070_12.html
- sponeil, on 11/06/2008, -2/+0Unless you want OpenGL support, which all ATI cards suck at.
- Gizza, on 11/07/2008, -1/+1I'd never get an X2 from Ati tho. Xfire is pretty hit and miss and nowhere near as good as SLi.
masterkenobi, on 11/05/2008, -4/+7eVGA hasn't done me wrong so far, I currently have the GeForce 8800 GTS 640mb....if I were to upgrade tomorrow, I'd probably get the eVGA GTX 280, which through pricegrabber goes for $417.19. If you prefer the BFG Tech flavor, that goes for $399.99 at TigerDirect.
- mmx2000, on 11/06/2008, -1/+5I also have that same eVGA card, it's great. Is it worth it for me to replace it with a single GTX 280+ style card, or would it be effective to get a second 8800 GTS and put them in SLI (my mobo is SLI but I only have 1 card atm).
  - sexybobo, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1If you have a 640mb GTS then it will be hard to find one to match for SLI.
    If the choice was between getting a 9800 or 2 8800 in SLI i would say the 2 8800 but the 280 chips are so much better then the 8800. I would say you'd get more bang from your buck with a 280
  - smhTheory, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0within the last week i upgraded from two 8800 gts 640 megs to one evga gtx 280. as soon as i had it in i overclocked it to the same clock speeds as that bfg card with the water block. it runs cooler than the 8800s did at stock speeds, and blows them away fps-wise. eats stalker clear sky up and begs for more @1920x1080.
  - masterkenobi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I would go for the GTX 280 vs adding a second 8800. Hell, why don't you get two GTX 280's? :D
- adlep, on 11/06/2008, -1/+6I don't understand why masterkenobi has been dugg down for his comment
  He didn't say anything offensive?
  It seems like digging people up or down is a random thing in here...
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1Maybe people don't care about his personal upgrade decisions?
- Cyberdactyl, on 11/06/2008, -2/+1I also have that exact card. I've been VERY happy with it for all new games (CO4, Far Cry 2, Bioshock). . .with the exception of. . . yes, you guessed it, Crysis, which brought it to its knees.
- Corporealshift, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0I had (and loved) this card. Then one day it died on me. I think it was overheating from day one but eVGA denies that up and down of course. It lasted me just over a year before it croaked. I have 2 24" monitors and I do sometimes do some long 3-D renders, but who knows. Either way it's the first time I haven't gotten multiple years out of a card and I'm somewhat disappointed in that. I now have an ATI 4850 which is working well, but I won't know how well it lasts for a while yet.
doublefelix, on 11/06/2008, -6/+3I am going to wait until the £/$ conversion rate improves than load up on these.
- Elranzer, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1You can buy the cheaper US versions, you know.
- Slackdragon, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1*then
tHr333, on 11/06/2008, -14/+1But can it run Crysis?
- Apocryphax64, on 11/06/2008, -0/+11Yes actually, the all can. Quite well. 1280x1024, 4x AA and High/Very high settings on Crysis Warhead with the HIS 4850 ICEQ4.
- TonyTheTerrible, on 11/06/2008, -0/+14But can you be funny?
- RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -1/+6Actually, no, none of them can; however, they can DISPLAY it extremely well.
Barnettizer, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2What a waste of EGA
- RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6Keep your VGA then. To each their own.
- Joomal, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3Kings Quest 1 on a CGA monitor... ahh the good ole days.
YouAreDead, on 11/06/2008, -11/+1It will run vista
- norman619, on 11/06/2008, -0/+5You mean these things are stand alone computers? And here I thought we were discussing video cards. Oh well....
lauraT1987, on 11/06/2008, -1/+11If only price was not an issue!
- RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -1/+8The techie mantra in a nutshell.
dfross, on 11/06/2008, -8/+2This isn't so much a list of the best graphics cards for the gaming, as the most pimped out cards.

X2s are pimped out by default, the rest are a combination of water-cooling, overclocking and extreme(ly expensive) air cooling.

Best bang for buck overall is definitely the 4850, though it won't play the highest end today, let alone in a year's time. The 4870x2 is the fastest single-slot card. The 4870 or the GTX280 are the best cards for playing recent games with good settings. Overall ATi has the lead right now, though it took until this generation for them to wrest it from nVidia, whose last 2 generations have been uninspiring.
- LocalDocal, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2Uh, no, the 4850 will definitely play the latest games. Hell, I'm still playing the latest games with a 8600GTS.
  - dfross, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0Depends entirely on what settings you're on.
    
    My 512M 8800GT was fine running CoD4 in 1680x1050 with everything on. However, with everything on in Warhammer: Age of Reckoning, it struggled.
    
    512M 4870, heavily overclocked, hasn't struggled with Far Cry 2 etc on high settings. On ultra high, it can stutter occasionally.
    
    However a 4850 will struggle if you play in a very high res (1900x1200 up), with graphic options on max. Sure, you can play the latest games on a 8600 even (or any DirectX8+ card), though you're not going to get the best experience with all the pretty options turned on, which was my point. A 4850 won't run the latest stuff at a high res with everything on, especially DirectX 10.
    
    Hell even a 4870x2 can be pushed if you run Crysis at the highest settings it allows you, go see the benchmarks.
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1@dfross: Okay, but if you can afford a monitor with a "1900x1200 up" resolution you likely aren't considering the 4850s price range anyway.
    
    For the record, the 4850 plays MOST of "the latest stuff" at high res with everything on just fine for me. My monitor, like most widescreens around 22", only has a max resolution of 1680x1050 anyway. It's silly to pit a mid ranged card against something like the 4870x2. They aren't aimed at the same markets. If you want and can afford the 4870x2 there's no need to even consider the 4850. Your point is entirely moot.
  - LocalDocal, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0@Dfross
    
    With 1920x1200+ resolution and max settings, ANY card will struggle on intensive games. I'm fairly sure even a 4870X2 will struggle somewhat on Crysis if you play it at 1920x1200 with all settings turned up to the hilt. However, a 4850 should be more than reasonable for most games, and that is with high res and settings.
    
    P.S. I recently played Far Cry 2. I was able to achieve mid-high settings on 1280x900 res. Not the most impressive thing, but the graphics look excellent. Too bad the game is unbelievably boring.
    
    EDIT: Link - http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=6 ...
    
    There's a review of the 4870 X2 on Crysis at 1920x1200. It gets an average fps of 39 and that's not even with maximum settings. On 2560x1600 res with max settings, I imagine the fps would be killed.
- Lasereth, on 11/06/2008, -1/+5The 4850 will play anything but Crysis maxed out. What are you smoking brah.
- Muler36, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1and talking of generations, do you not remember the geforce 5? the 9700 and 9800's wiped the floor with them. Clearly you haven't been around too long.
- BrokenVisage, on 11/06/2008, -3/+2Give it a wrest.
  - Slackdragon, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2I dugg you up.
    
    Not sure why you're getting negative diggs for your play on his "wrest it from nVidia" statement.
  - BrokenVisage, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Wrestless diggers no doubt.
    
    (this comment should, however, be dugg down for such a pun)
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2The last time the phrase "pimped out" was cool people were still listening to Green Day and Converses were still somewhat ironic.
sodoh, on 11/06/2008, -1/+21The only thing to be really aware of is that if you are running windows 32bit then there is a limit to the memory you have in your machine.

You can only address 4GB of memory, but some of those addresses are needed for other things. Graphics card included.

Normally you can get 3.5GB of memory but if you are going all out on graphics cards your going to loose accessible memory. I have a machine with two EV3A GTX 280 (1GB each) SLI'ed. The machine has max of 2.3 GB of accessible memory (due to other devices as well).

From graphics point of view I haven't found anything at all to tax the machine though (crysis included).
- YouAreDead, on 11/06/2008, -2/+6i have 64 bit,
  - sodoh, on 11/06/2008, -2/+0I envy you :D
  - bwmdiym, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results. ...
    Buy it install it and enjoy vista sp1 isnt that bad
- L0NER, on 11/06/2008, -0/+15True, Windows is starting to show its age. I hope windows7 is 64 bit exsclisive, forcing drivers and software manufactures to embrace the future.
  - PueSi, on 11/06/2008, -2/+14There's no real reason to not use Vista 64bit to this day. The driver issues are almost completely gone, I've yet to encounter a missing driver.
  - YouAreDead, on 11/06/2008, -0/+7same here, running vista 64bit without any problems
  - norman619, on 11/06/2008, -4/+2I'm running Vista 64 bit as well. To say there is no reason is kinda silly. There is still a shortage of 64 bit drivers for many devices.
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3"There is still a shortage of 64 bit drivers for many devices."
    
    Such as...
  - homercles337, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Actually, if you are on VPN some places (like MIT) do not have a 64-bit Cisco AnyConnect VPN server in place.
  - aaron552, on 11/07/2008, -0/+2I've had issues with older 32-bit games...
    The issues mainly revolve around copy protection drivers
- RealmDown, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4My rule of thumb for recommending upgrading your computer: When the video card can hold more memory, it's past time to start looking.
- norman619, on 11/06/2008, -7/+3Actually 32 bit can only address 3 GB. Anything more and you need a 64 bit OS.
  - NathanielJ, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2Source?
  - Orsenfelt, on 11/06/2008, -2/+6No, It's 4Gb..
  - Narcowski, on 11/06/2008, -3/+3You're wrong, I've got 4GB in my laptop with 32bit Vista, and I've got 3582 MB or that indexed.
    The other bits of indexing go to GPU memory.
  - elitebmo, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3I recently built a new machine with 4Gbs of RAM and windows x32 only recognized 3Gb of it. It was obvious after right clicking properties on 'my computer'.
    
    After reformatting and FINALLY installing a x64bit xp pro os, it recognized all 4gbs.
  - ByteGuerilla, on 11/06/2008, -0/+7It's 4GB, and here's why. Each individual byte of memory has an address as part of the system's address space. In a 32bit system the address space is expressed as a binary number 32 bits long, from 00000000000000000000000000000001 to 11111111111111111111111111111111.
    
    There are 2^32 possible addresses in that range. 2^32 is 4,294,967,296 individual bytes of memory, which is 4GB (4,294,967,296 / (1024^3)).
    
    Some of that 4GB of addressable space is reserved by the operating system for accelerating the PCI bus (256MB) and other things.
    
    A 64bit system has a much larger address space due to having twice the binary word size. 2^64 is 18,446,744,073,709,551,616. I can't be bothered to look it up at the moment but iirc that's 18 exabytes of addressable space.
  - spritom, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3When Windows is saying 3.2GB or some other number well below the 4GB number, the extra 800MB or so is still being addressed. Just not from your system memory for you to use in that way. But it's still addressing 4GB.
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -3/+1You're being dugg down by idiots.
    
    First hit on Google:
    http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum- ...
    
    The practical limit is 3GB, like it or not.
  - homercles337, on 11/06/2008, -0/+32^32 = 4.2950e+009
  - squirrelninja, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4Byteguerilla is correct in his statement, and vista service pack one addressed the 3.2 gig ceiling and raised it to its max of 4 gigs. all that cant be indexed due to other hardware demands and software settings. 64 bit systems with a much better address size of usable data. his calculations are correct and thats why vista 64 bit can handle over triple what 32 bit.
  - aaron552, on 11/07/2008, -1/+1As already stated, 32-bit systems can address up to 4GB of memory, however a large portion gets stolen by the OS/BIOS to address the various other device on your system
- BigPapi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4I just made the switch to 64-bit vista. There's really not much difference except that you have to make an effort to find third-party hardware that has driver support.
- sanosuke001, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0The issue is only when you buy a pre-built system. If you build your own, get ***** that has driver support for your OS.
  
  If you buy from Dell/Sony/Alienware/etc then you have issues if their drivers don't support 64bit. I was looking at an Alienware laptop and they don't have any laptops that can be bundled with 64bit Vista. The laptop I was looking at had SLI video cards (there's 1GB RAM) and they would sell me 4GB in the machine. So now, my address space is down to 2.3GB after windows takes what it needs for virtual stuffs and my video RAM. 1/2 of that ram, unusable.
Carburetor, on 11/06/2008, -6/+11Don't buy radeon hd if you're using linux (and windows for gaming).
That's true that you get more performance per price when buying ati, but if you're using linux as desktop it won't give you much.
Their drivers are crappy, that on linux, every ancient geforce from 6 series will beat
the crap out of them.

Ati made me suffer the last five years, I won't use them anymore, even not for free.

Can't wait to put my hands on a brand new geforce card.
- mysticalone, on 11/06/2008, -2/+10Didn't AMD/ati recently improve the quality of their drivers by a lot, fixing problems surrounding Compwiz thing
  - Carburetor, on 11/06/2008, -4/+4They did, but it still stands way behind nvidia.
    Their official drivers still have weird issues like slow scrolling in Firefox when using composition, blank screens when playing videos, and if you have avivo chipset, you're going to suffer more..
    
    And the open source drivers? well, half fps of what you suppose to have, some products may work better, some worse.
    
    I still remember my geforce mx card, five years ago, worked
    awesome.
    I think Ati had enough time to improve their drivers, they didn't do much for their Linux customers.
  - squirrelninja, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Problem is your still using linux. ATI addressed a bunch of its driver problems, yet they only had so much resources and time to do it with. So they addressed the largest marketing share they could in their fixes, Windows.
- kukiweed, on 11/06/2008, -2/+7I dual boot Ubuntu 8.10 64 and Win XP and I have an ATI 4850, never had a problem in Ubuntu (didn't play games though, that's what I keep the Windows partition for). Also no problem with videos using mplayer, or with firefox. It was all plug'n'play.
- Kacper86, on 11/06/2008, -1/+4it's not true anymore. ATI/AMD releases new graphic driver every month now.
- Orsenfelt, on 11/06/2008, -2/+1You can't blanketly say that ATi is better bang for buck.
  
  It entirely depends on what cards you are comparing.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2Ubuntu 8.10 seems just fine running my 4850 with ATIs drivers. I think you might be doing something wrong.
- molochi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Am typing this in Ubuntu 8.10 64 using the "click to activate" drivers provided by the base install. Videocard is an HD 4850 on a 3GHz Core2Duo. Alien Arena and Tremulous work fine. Compiz effects were disabled by default, so videos don't flicker. It's acceptable.
RobotLeAwesome, on 11/06/2008, -4/+43my 8800gt plays whatever I throw at it and was cheeeeeap
- Nath2k8, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1I second this motion.
- Frozo, on 11/06/2008, -0/+5Same here. Running on Intel Mac actually.
- newdigger, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2Agreed. Apart from Crysis/Warhead, my 8800GT Superclocked still plays everything I throw at it @ 1680x1050 w/ max settings.
  - RobotLeAwesome, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I can run Crysis pretty well, but yeah – not maxed, it should get me through another year without having any problems; most of the good games coming out don't really have amazingly high specs which is a nice trend
  - cobainirvana, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I actually have 2 of those cards in this baby right now. I can handle crysis on very high but NOT crysis warhead on the max graphics level. I blame norton. Awesome graphics card though. I'm gonna use it for years....bioshock was beautiful with Dx10. Quad core 2gram vista (bleh Go XP!)
- opensourcer, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Got my 8800gt a year ago and it still runs great on games or graphic programs I throw at it. One negative thing is the Nvidia driver update. Got a BSOD in Lego Indian Jones after the update. I just revert back to pre-update and it's fine.
- 2Bnor2B, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1They are such a good buy that dual 8800 GTs are the way to go now.
mysticalone, on 11/06/2008, -2/+2how about (intel) motherboards and lcd monitors? gimme a top 5

EDIT: found the motherboards on their site...just need monitors.
- AchaIemoipas, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Pro tip: don't even bother looking at specs for monitors.
  
  Go to the store and check them out yourself. Monitors are weird creatures. Sometimes the cheaper ones are better. Especially LCD monitors.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Samsung SyncMaster 2253bw 22" is what I have. Pretty nice, and it wasn't terribly expensive.
  
  What's your price range though? Honestly, when it comes to monitors, like most computer parts, it's more about how much you are willing to pay rather than what is the absolute best.
L0NER, on 11/06/2008, -2/+2does anyone have a list of top five cards for 3D modeling and animation?
- falkonv7l, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2nVidia Quadro types
- sanosuke001, on 11/06/2008, -0/+0ati fireGL
- L0NER, on 11/07/2008, -0/+1Thanks!
diecastbeatdown, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2http://www.gpureview.com - great site for card comparisons.
Fhwqhgads, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2I wanna run UT3 and upcoming GTA4 at max settings at 1680x1050.

I meet the requirements for both games besides the card. Tired of crappy graphics in new games :p

What would be the best option without spending a fortune?
- kukiweed, on 11/06/2008, -0/+8HD4850. Get one with a custom cooler though.
  If you don't care about the level of AA, you can go with even cheaper cards like 9800GT/8800GTS/HD4830. But if you want ridiculous levels of AA, go with 4850 or the bigger brother 4870.
  I have a 4850 and a 22'' screen and I can play Grid (for example) with everything on max and 24xAA, it looks awesome.. For comparison, PS3 can't do no AA while xbox360 only does 2xAA in Grid, and that's at a lower resolution...
- Lasereth, on 11/06/2008, -0/+6He's right, get the 4850.
- Lunarbunny, on 11/06/2008, -0/+11 4850 is nice, but for less than the price of a GTX280, you can get 2 of them. That's assuming you have a CrossFire-capable motherboard, otherwise it's going to cost you a lot more.
  
  I've been running them in CrossFire and it's been pretty much slaughtering everything I play. I wish there was a hotfix for CrossFire in Fallout 3 though, performance suffers in F3 with it enabled.
  - Fhwqhgads, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1My motherboard is fail. only one PCIe slot :(
  - aaron552, on 11/07/2008, -0/+1Or get the 4850 X2
  - Lunarbunny, on 11/07/2008, -0/+1The 4850X2 appears to be a new offering, probably driven by the popularity of the setup I have. I couldn't even find one on Newegg when I posted this.
techdever, on 11/06/2008, -10/+21too bad none work with OSX
- Exzhaton, on 11/06/2008, -2/+11Owned.
- 0260, on 11/06/2008, -3/+31What are you gonna play on it? rollercoaster tycoon 3?
  - techdever, on 11/06/2008, -2/+1that and CoD4
- molochi, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1That's a surprise (NSI), I thought OSX driver support was better than Linux.
  - aaron552, on 11/07/2008, -0/+1you got trolled by Macfags then
scrubzor, on 11/06/2008, -3/+2too bad by the time you buy one of these... it will no longer be in the top 5. graphics card technology moves so damn fast!!
- kukiweed, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4Nope, actually the next real generation of cards, on 40nm, will come in June next year (at the earliest).
  - nonymous666, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Nvidia's successor to the 260 and 280 are due in January or February.
- slvrbullet87, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2The secret to that is to get a reliable card for a couple hundred bucks that will last for a few years... you dont have to have the newest card to be able to play the newest games. I am very happy with my 8800 GTS. I have owned it for a year and i plan on owning it for another 18 months, maybe longer.
maleficdog, on 11/06/2008, -2/+30BREAKING: expensive and high end graphic cards are good for gaming.
- aaron552, on 11/07/2008, -0/+1Thankyou captain obvious! :D
PawFox, on 11/06/2008, -4/+6Finally!, a site which uses GBP inded of the Dollar
- Maurik, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1dugg regardless of bad spelling.
- darkNiGHTS, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3Yeah, and if you look at the bottom of the page, it gives you a little hint. It's located in the UK. No way!
NuUBix, on 11/06/2008, -3/+5I am quite happy with my 8800gtx so I don't plain on upgrading anytime soon.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -4/+1You want some kind of prize?
Ins4ne, on 11/06/2008, -8/+5
But can they Run crysis ?
- occasus, on 11/06/2008, -5/+2No, but I'm sure they can run Crysis.
- 0260, on 11/06/2008, -4/+6Yes, We CAN!
deepleet, on 11/06/2008, -1/+5No love for Intel GMA?
- AchaIemoipas, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1That's about as low end as you can get. A graphic card equivalent would cost about 50 bucks.
  - SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Buried. A 50 dollar graphics card would run circles around GMA!
- Icetype, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Sometimes Intel is what you're stuck with. Laptops, etc. You can get a surprising amount of speed out of them if you tweak your settings. I'm not saying they're good, just that they're usable. I remember playing Mythos on my macbook (in windows). The detail had to be set to balls, but it was smooth.
  
  The half-life2 engine games can be set to directx-8 mode via the command line, and then they fly. No eyecandy, but whatever.
adlep, on 11/06/2008, -8/+1Buried as inaccurate. I can get all these cards for almost half over at Newegg.com
Whats the point of submitting and Digging prices in British pounds?
- RickyTheRiot, on 11/06/2008, -1/+5adlep, I am sure you aren't meaning to be arrogant, but that's exactly what your comment sounded like.
  
  There are other currencies than the US Dollar, in fact the majority of the world uses a currency that isn't the US Dollar, and Digg is not US only.
  
  If I complained every time a Dugg site mentioned a price in dollars I would be posting replies on just about every thread and getting flamed like a madman for doing so.
  
  In terms of price, I can appreciate if you can get them cheaper in the US, but that might not always be the case and a lot of European countries will charge tax on top of an order shipped from the US so in the end it rarely works out that cheaper. Of course all that depends on how weak the dollar is in the markets.
  - adlep, on 11/06/2008, -2/+1This is not the case. US dollar is still commonly used throughout the world. Even now, more people use US Dollar than the Euro to conduct international transactions.
    For example, the price of barrel of oil is listed in US dollars and not in British Pounds or Euros.
    
    On the other hand, prices of video cards in the US are much cheaper than everywhere else in the world and as such they should be used as a benchmark of "what is possible".
    The tax can be easily avoided as well, especially when you buy items through EBay and the US seller is willing to ship to Europe (I have no problems with international shipping).
- Muler36, on 11/06/2008, -2/+7whats inaccurate about using british sterling on a british site? I can't believe American's ignorance sometimes.
- stk198323, on 11/06/2008, -1/+3Maybe the point is that some people actually live in England? The website is from the UK?
  
  Or simply that your a random moron thinking that since he's american, no one else diserve any right's! But that will be taken care of when your economy finally collapse completly and people starts to use another currency as the main comparison for other country!
  - adlep, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I am actually not American and I am not ignorant at all. But, the fact is that you can get all these cards much cheaper in the US.
    
    I have no problem with the technical content of the article, but if is meant for the INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCE, the prices should be listed in US Dollars or Euros.
    In fact, US prices are frequently available to people who live in the UK. I have sold many video cards on EBay to people in the United Kindom for the "US" price.
  - Muler36, on 11/10/2008, -0/+1i don't mean to ***** on your parade a bit adlep, but the US Dollar isn't international (well not by any of the countries choice).
- Beakerz, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2In his defense he probably saw it was just .com and not .co.uk or anything like that (not sure how that works over there) and just assumed. A wrong assumption, but don't hang him for it, jesus. lol
sodade, on 11/06/2008, -2/+2Why don't they rate heat and sound output of Video Cards? The last two cards I bought dramatically increased my case temp and they both sound like tinny jet engines.
shiftzor, on 11/06/2008, -2/+8C'mon, everyone! Lets go play Fallout 3!!!
- Beakerz, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2Fallout 3 on a Dell 3007WFP-HC monitor combined with a 4870x2 is just.... brilliant. Loving every second of it so far :D
- Orsenfelt, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2Except not the main storyline, cause it's terrible!!
  
  (Rest of the game is brilliant however.)
RickyTheRiot, on 11/06/2008, -1/+6The only shame is that these sorts of lists are obsolete with the month as a new set of cards come out.

In terms of comparison graphs, I tend to use Tom's Hardware. This is their "best gfx cards of Oct 08" review..

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Best-Graphics-Card,r ...

And they also have a pretty decent comparison list of nearly all the cards available...

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/gaming-graphi ...

The link above shows the cards tested under 3D Mark 06, but there are a tranche of other tests available..

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/gaming-graphi ...

There are also some CPU benchmarks too..

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/desktop-cpu-c ...

As a final note. Don't buy a Sapphire. I got a Sapphire X1950XT (256Mb) PCIe, and it's been nothing but trouble (I've been an ATI fan from the start and never had as many problems as I have had with this one).
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I have a Sapphire 4850 and haven't had any problems with it.
- Lunarbunny, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I'm running ASUS 4850s in CrossFire and they've been fine. I should have gotten the ones with the dual-slot coolers though, these single slot coolers sound like jet engines.
DeFex, on 11/06/2008, -9/+1Dont waste your money on latest gen cards.
especially not for games. come on its just games.
- bobdigi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2u mad
TinababyK, on 11/06/2008, -7/+7still NvIdia is better
average650, on 11/06/2008, -0/+12I'm pretty sure that almost anyone who cared to know what the top 5 graphics cards are didn't need this list to tell them...
diablo2032, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3As long as my video card runs COD4 smoothly, i wont be upgrading any time soon... diablo2032 on xfire, hit me up if u want a match
solid12345, on 11/06/2008, -0/+13You are pretty much pissing away 600 dollars to run Crysis on Max. Most PC games don't even go near half of these specs, my 8800GTX still plays 99% of all games with smooth framerates at high resolutions.
reformation, on 11/06/2008, -7/+2If you are considering spending this much on a card just to play games you should stop and think about why you are wasting your life playing computer games.
- Icetype, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3Games are an escape for a lot of people. Certainly better and cheaper than getting drunk at a bar every night.
- cobainirvana, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1What's wrong with getting drunk at a bar every night? jw....
redfred18t, on 11/06/2008, -2/+2By the time this article became popular on digg, those video cards are already out of date lol
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -3/+1Ahh, a message from someone who clearly doesn't know *****.
Kwipper, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3I have a 7900GT and I am using a 19 inch wide-screen monitor (1440 x 900 resolution). For some of the newer games it's starting to show it's age, but most games are still playable on medium settings.

Still though, I plan on waiting until it gets to the point where I can't run most games on medium settings well, or the card burns out before I plan on shelling out another 250 bucks on a new graphics card. By then a 250 graphics card would be a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over the one I have now.

Then repeat the above mentioned strategy.
TempusEdax, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Good timing on this article. I was so overcome with excitement about Fallout 3 that I downloaded it from steam without checking to see if my Radeon 9800 Pro can run it. Unfortunately, despite my long, long record of success with that card, it cannot.

I'm looking pretty hard at the 4850. If I can find a good deal on it and a RAM upgrade then maybe I can finally play all these awesome new games at something besides the lowest setting.
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I've been playing Fallout3 on my 4850, you won't be disappointed. I play at max with 4x AA and it provides silky smooth performance. ( In everything I've tried, even Crysis)
- molochi, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Is your Radeon 9800 Pro a PCI-E card?
- Lunarbunny, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I'm running CrossFire 4850s, although for Fallout 3 there hasn't been a CrossFire hotfix released and I've been having to run it on a single 4850...which isn't too bad, it still runs at "Ultra High" settings smoothly on a single 4850.
  
  Unless that 9800 Pro is PCI Express though, you're looking at a new motherboard. My last upgrade was an ASUS P5Q-Pro, C2D E8400, 2GB DDR2-800, and 2xASUS HD4850 for $720.
- TempusEdax, on 11/08/2008, -0/+0Yeah, after doing some more research, I realized I was going to need a new motherboard if I wanted a decent upgrade on my graphics card.
  
  Looks like I may have to become a console gamer.
visarya, on 11/06/2008, -4/+2i bet in six months these will be outdated
missingnoh4x, on 11/06/2008, -2/+2They left out the most important factor for me - how well the Linux driver works. I've got a terrible ATI Radeon X1200 and I need to replace it with something that won't result in random crashes, flickering xvid, and hell to set up xorg.conf.
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2Why the ***** are you gaming on Linux?
  - Zaggynl, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Why the ***** not?
    Bad drivers and low amount of games doesn't mean people don't try.
    Because that's the only roadblock left..
- Densetsu, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1OMG we're not meeting the needs of 0.5% of our market share who don't realize gaming on Linux sucks balls, stop production and devote a dozen programmers to optimizing our Linux drivers!
  
  Um, no.
Nyaos, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3I think the HD4870 is worth mentioning. It's not TOP tier, but for less than 300 dollars now it outperforms Nvidia's counterpart GTX260, and has wicked AA rendering under DX10. Easily max out Far Cry 2.
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1because a 4850 does everything the 4870 does, for $100 cheaper. (My friend has one and I have a 4850, in Crysis performance is pretty similar with both of us getting around 30 FPS at max with no AA.)
  
  It is a good card though, but it's just at a ***** price point when compared to the 4850 and 4870x2
Dhalamar, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2What about graphics cards for people who just want to play games? Not top of the line, but still good.
- InfernoX, on 11/06/2008, -0/+34850.
  
  I have one, plays everything at max no issues and it's fairly cheap.
  
  Hell, even a 4670 should work for msot people, it's under $100
penguirl, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3Dugg for a TechRadar story on one page.
jordantneff, on 11/06/2008, -5/+2Wow, really? My $120 8800 GT runs crysis on max settings. So why do people need to spend 4-6 times as much? Oh right, for those extra 5 precious frames per second. I feel so inferior now.
- Ktzero3, on 11/06/2008, -0/+7Not on a 24" monitor at 1920x1200 it won't...
- tatinthehat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3How are you running Crysis on max settings? Are you playing it at 640 x 400 or something?
  
  I own an 8800 GT, and only on medium I can get consistent frames without slowing down. At 1280 x 800, no less.
dreamofrevenge, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2You don't need anything else than a good overclocked 8800GT. Can play everything with a good CPU.
- Lunarbunny, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Good luck getting newer games to run well at 1920x1200.
  - tatinthehat, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Unfortunately, more and more games are now bottlenecked at the GPU level, rather by the CPU anymore.
  - dreamofrevenge, on 11/08/2008, -0/+1Not wasting my money in another monitor. 22' is just fine.
Smtn, on 11/06/2008, -1/+28800gt is still awesome value for money, anytime it starts to let you down just pick up another for dirt cheap and go xfire/sli.

having said that my 8800gt still pumps out 50+fps (1280x1024) on crysis very high settings, its gonna be at least 6 months before anything forces me to upgrade
SwordFish666, on 11/06/2008, -5/+1That list sucks to be honest...
Where the ***** is 4870...
- ZzFDKzZ, on 11/06/2008, -0/+4Its there you blind *****.
  - SwordFish666, on 11/07/2008, -2/+14870 not 4870X2
    Or am i ***** blind?
doughboy334, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3ATI definitely made a long need comeback with the 4000 series.
Fixion, on 11/06/2008, -1/+1Does anyone know of a site that lists notebooks sorted by their graphics cards?
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

The Top 5 Graphics Cards For Gaming

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Hardware

SDXC memory cards promise 2TB of storage, 300MBps transferthumb

CES 2009: USB 3.0 slower than expectedthumb

SanDisk Unveils Fast, Cheap Solid State Drives

Enter The Dragon: AMD Phenom II X4 940, Full Reviewthumb

A Closer Look at Apple's Advanced Notebook Battery Techthumb

Palm Pre in-depth impressionsthumb

Login or register to add a comment

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Hardware

Related by Keyword

Login or register to add a comment