Cheap graphics card advice

  • Thread starter Thread starter DJS0302
  • Start date Start date
D

DJS0302

What is the best graphics card currently available for less than a hundred
dollars? I have the following hardware on my pc.
Intel D875PBZ motherboard
2.6c GHz. Pentium 4 processor
512 MB DDR 400 ram
Windows XP Home
Yes, I know with that setup I could probably use a much more expensive graphics
card but I'm really not into gaming. I do play some games but they're usually
the ones that don't require a lot of horsepower.
 
DJS0302 said:
What is the best graphics card currently available for less than a
hundred dollars? I have the following hardware on my pc.
Intel D875PBZ motherboard
2.6c GHz. Pentium 4 processor
512 MB DDR 400 ram
Windows XP Home
Yes, I know with that setup I could probably use a much more
expensive graphics card but I'm really not into gaming. I do play
some games but they're usually the ones that don't require a lot of
horsepower.
Click to expand...


The ATI Radeon 9000 or 9200 are both under $100USD.
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...=48&manufactory=1126&description=&Order=price
 
I bought a Radeon with 64 megs of RAM for something like 30 dollars at
TigerDirect and it even has video out that can be used to output to a TV or
VCR and it works good. The real powerful ones are for big time gamers but
for most other things they are not necessary.
 
I bought a Radeon with 64 megs of RAM for something like 30 dollars at
TigerDirect and it even has video out that can be used to output to a TV or
VCR and it works good. The real powerful ones are for big time gamers but
for most other things they are not necessary.
Click to expand...

Was that the 9100-9200? Tiger direct has had the best prices on cheap
ATIs in ongoing sales with rebate but it gets bashed so much as a
sleazy outfit I dont know what to think. Ive never bought anything
from Tiger.


Lots of places are selling the Tiger 9200SE with 128 megs for $49 or
so. Office max is having sale this week on one make $49 after a
rebate. Ive seen it online at Price watch for $43 or so.

SE means wimpified in some way usually though.

Ive seen the 9600 SE in sale sometimes down to $69.
 
How do you shop for video cards? What should you look at to determine
price/value? How do I tell how much better a Radeon 9600 is than a Radeon
9000?
 
What is the best graphics card currently available for less than a hundred
dollars? I have the following hardware on my pc.
Intel D875PBZ motherboard
2.6c GHz. Pentium 4 processor
512 MB DDR 400 ram
Windows XP Home
Yes, I know with that setup I could probably use a much more expensive graphics
card but I'm really not into gaming. I do play some games but they're usually
the ones that don't require a lot of horsepower.
Click to expand...

In that case there might be three issues:

1) How much support for other, potentially more demanding games do you
want to budget for? You mention $100, but clearly today's "non-demanding"
games don't need anywhere near a $100 card.

2) 2D Image quality - low end cards can vary a lot in image quality.
Unfortunately I don't have any specific recommendations for which
manufacturers are currently producing best 2D cards, but it can vary per
same chipset. For example, one Radeon 9200 may look better than
similar/same Radeon 9200 from different manufacturer.

3) Features desired - DVI, TV-Out Coax or S-Video, S-Video in, dual
display support, passive or fanned heatsink, etc. Obviously we'd all like
to have "everything" but the cost difference may be a factor, particularly
when some are on sale or w/rebates.
 
How do you shop for video cards? What should you look at to determine
price/value? How do I tell how much better a Radeon 9600 is than a Radeon
9000?
Click to expand...

Well besides the obvious thing that Kony brought up - whether it has
the features you want like DVI , TV out etc ---- usually theres a big
difference in the low end. Some of them can do Direct X 9 features and
some cant. Like say ATI - I think the 7000, 8500, etc doesnt support
Direct X 9 features while the others can. If it cant then you cant run
some of the newest games period.

Im not even going to mention 2D quality.

This can be a moot point in that some of the most cutting edge games
also need a fair amount of power so if you get the wimpiest boards
that can support DIrect X 9 features itll run them really slow. For
instance the Nvdia 5200 based cards support Direct X 9 but all the
reviews claim that its too slow to enable all the features and run a
lot of the demanding games at a decent frame rate.

Theres a lot of variation depending on who you talk to - how much of a
gamester they are , what constitutes decent performance. With some -
they bash anything and theyll tell you , only a $200 card is "decent".
While others swear they can stand a $100 card. The resolution you run
in the games in makes a difference in speed and so do the effects you
turn on.

Probably an ATI 9600 is OK for most. Theres lots of talk about the
upcoming games like DOOM , what card will be decent with it. Some
people claim even the most powerful card out now will be bogged down
to a large extent running it. Thats kind of hard to believe since it
drastically reduces the market for the game if you must have a super
powerful card.

It all depends on how much of a gamer you are. The best thing is to
ask someone who is a real game nut - someone who has upgraded from a
9200/9600 level to a 9800 level card and see what they say . Keeping
in mind that some of them are really hardware snobs. You know - you
HAVE to have a 9800 Pro or the NVDA 6800 or you are a fool !

Im about to try out various games with my 9800 so Ill get a better
idea about the performance. I upgraded from a MX 420 so I dont have a
good idea how a 9200 or 9600 fares. The best you can do is read the
reviews where they test games and use benchmarks.
 
Well besides the obvious thing that Kony brought up - whether it has
the features you want like DVI , TV out etc ---- usually theres a big
difference in the low end. Some of them can do Direct X 9 features and
some cant. Like say ATI - I think the 7000, 8500, etc doesnt support
Direct X 9 features while the others can. If it cant then you cant run
some of the newest games period.
Click to expand...

Similar to the situation with DX7 cards and DX8 games, most DX9 games will
run on DX8 cards but slower and/or with less eye candy. I suppose another
issue would then be if a modern game costing ~$50 is worth the price if
the majority of the "worth" of the game is spectacular graphics... if you
had a good enough card to play it.

Im not even going to mention 2D quality.

This can be a moot point in that some of the most cutting edge games
also need a fair amount of power so if you get the wimpiest boards
that can support DIrect X 9 features itll run them really slow. For
instance the Nvdia 5200 based cards support Direct X 9 but all the
reviews claim that its too slow to enable all the features and run a
lot of the demanding games at a decent frame rate.

Theres a lot of variation depending on who you talk to - how much of a
gamester they are , what constitutes decent performance. With some -
they bash anything and theyll tell you , only a $200 card is "decent".
While others swear they can stand a $100 card. The resolution you run
in the games in makes a difference in speed and so do the effects you
turn on.

Probably an ATI 9600 is OK for most. Theres lots of talk about the
upcoming games like DOOM , what card will be decent with it. Some
people claim even the most powerful card out now will be bogged down
to a large extent running it. Thats kind of hard to believe since it
drastically reduces the market for the game if you must have a super
powerful card.
Click to expand...

It seems many gamers wait till they buy a (relatively good for that era)
card then take to claims that everyone else should be running 4X FSAA,
1600x1200, when that's not always the best choice, especially for someone
with an LCD having lower native resolution.
It all depends on how much of a gamer you are. The best thing is to
ask someone who is a real game nut - someone who has upgraded from a
9200/9600 level to a 9800 level card and see what they say . Keeping
in mind that some of them are really hardware snobs. You know - you
HAVE to have a 9800 Pro or the NVDA 6800 or you are a fool !
Click to expand...

I have this theory that WWIII will be fought over video cards. ;-)

Im about to try out various games with my 9800 so Ill get a better
idea about the performance. I upgraded from a MX 420 so I dont have a
good idea how a 9200 or 9600 fares. The best you can do is read the
reviews where they test games and use benchmarks.
Click to expand...

9200 is fairly slow, might be better off getting an 8500. 9600 has
slightly less raw power than a GF4TI4200 but makes up for that with better
FSAA & DX9 support. FX5200 isn't really a gamer's card at all, just
nVidia's entry level successor to GF4MX, where they mention games simply
to try taking that high-volume market away from ATI. I never could
understand how some places keep a straight face when pricing FX5200 cards
above $100.

Sometimes newegg has refurb'd GF4TI4200 cards for $50-55, that might be
the best bang for the buck right now.
 
I am not referring to games in the least. I want to know how to price
compare cards. Just because something is $50 more does not mean its $50
better. What metrics do you look at? Pixel rate, etc...
 
I am not referring to games in the least. I want to know how to price
compare cards. Just because something is $50 more does not mean its $50
better. What metrics do you look at? Pixel rate, etc...
Click to expand...

If not referring to games then the features should be most important.
You'd have to determine what you, personally, value, since more often
that not gaming performance is the far most determinant factor in card
prices.

Any modern card is plenty fast enough for general purpose 2D use like DVD,
video editing, web/office/etc, so a very cheap card can be used, even one
of yesteryear's cards so long as it's not TOO old, like within last 4
years. To a certain extent the amount of memory still matters for
image editing because at "X" zoom factor you'd want a card with enough
memory onboard to hold the entire zoomed image. So for example a high-res
picture from a camera or scanner, say 2000 x 2000 resolution full color
image zoomed to 4X needs the following for optimal editing speed:

Width * Height * BPP * zoomed to 4² / (bits per MB conversion)

2000 * 2000 * 32 * 4 * 4 / (8 * 1024 * 1024) = 244 MB of video card memory
 
I am not referring to games in the least. I want to know how to price
compare cards. Just because something is $50 more does not mean its $50
better. What metrics do you look at? Pixel rate, etc...
Click to expand...

You dont need to mess with that because thats all about game
performance. Like he said virtually all cards unless you get an
ANCIENT card will be ok for non-games, non-specialized graphics uses.



If all your going to do is surf the net and do word processing - like
Kony said , you can get a pretty cheap card. I put together a Leadtek
with built in video - a 400 mx level with 32 shared megs and the guy
is super happy. Hes a doctor and all he does is listen to some MP3s,
surf the net and wordprocessing. I mean , this guy is jazzed. I would
get at least 64 megs though.

You can pick one up - theres one on sale this week (check
www.salescircular.com ) for $29. I dont see it at their website
OUTPOST.com so it might be a mistake or only instore.

If you want to at least try a game once in a while - theres the 9200SE
128 megs this week at compusa with a $20-30 rebate bringing it down
to $49 I think

It almost all games. Games the 3d effects - getting the basics of 3d
graphics at various framerates + at various resolutions - raw speed is
what its really about with cards and then adding newer effects.


The best deas in the low end are as I mentioned the slightly older era
cards that are still around but starting to get phased out or will be
phased out in the fairly near future -

NVDIA 400mx-420mx -440mx
ATI 7000, 8500

With these look for inputs, outputs and memory 32 , 64 , 128
Having too little memory can prevent even some moderately older games
not to run and limits the resolution possibly you can run at.
Also things like whether the company making the card doesnt have a
really bad rep though I havent heard of any but some people like or
bad mouth certain makes. And stuff like what kind of cooling is on it.
For instance an early Maddog 400mx I bought just had a small heatsink
for cooling. It suddenly stopped working so I got a new one to replace
from the same company and saw that they started putting fans on the
same heatsink. The other 420 and 400mx I bought from other makers had
fans on them.

You can find the 400-440 often on rebate sales for $29-39 but not on
sale it can be as high as $59 - gross out price. I got my 420 on
clearance at office depot for somewhere around $20 in store. This
series used to be the most popular cheap game card years ago believe
it or not. The low 32 meg versions can run some older games. The 64
meg versions cant run some newer games like Silent hill because it
doesnt support some DX 9 features.

Same with the ATI 7000 - 8500. Ive seen the 7000 on clearance as low
as $14 at office depot. These should be cheap , just try to get one
with at least 32 or more megs if they even make one less than that.

If you want to get a card that has marginal modern 3d game graphics
abilities - the 400mx can actually still play a fair amount of games
the old NVDA based cards i mentioned but more and more newer games are
coming out that cant run on it. If you want to get one that can do dx9
stuff though on the very low end of the speed range - get a
NVDA 5200 which has been on sale as low as $59
or as we mentioned the ATI based 9000-9100-9200.


NVDA also started selling this thing called the 4000MX in the very low
end. Im not sure if its just a repackaging of the old 400-440mx or if
its a lower card than the 5200 series that can do Direct X 9.
 
Back
Top