Is $500 Video card any better than $50?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Red Cloud
  • Start date Start date
Red Cloud said:
What's advantage of $500 card over $50 card like radeon 9200?
Click to expand...

When you play $50 3D games rather than $5 ones. You are paying for the 3D
engine and it's level of computing power, shaders, pipelines, amount and
speed of memory, etc. The 2D quality and ability of basically every card
made in the last 7-10 years is about the same.
 
When you play $50 3D games rather than $5 ones. You are paying for the 3D
engine and it's level of computing power, shaders, pipelines, amount and
speed of memory, etc. The 2D quality and ability of basically every card
made in the last 7-10 years is about the same.
Click to expand...


why not? Afterall $50 radeon9200 can play any game. I don't know if I
upgrade
my card.
 
why not? Afterall $50 radeon9200 can play any game. I don't know if I
upgrade
my card.
Click to expand...

Define any.

There are some games that are total non -starters - the ones that
demand a minimum of Shader model 3. (Spiderman 3 for example). And
there are a whole host of games that will not be playable due to an
insufficient frame rate. I doubt you could play Half Life 2, or Gears
of War or any new game even at low resolutions.

I wouldn't try any DX10 games on a 9200, it just won't be enough.

Some of us demand certain resolutions - I run some 2 year old games
at 1600 x1200 resolution (Battlefield 2) on an X850 XT - a card that 4
years ago was the fastest thing ATI made. But I know if I went to run
a DX10 game I would have to dramatically drop the resolution. My card
won't run Spiderman 3 either by the way.

James
 
why not? Afterall $50 radeon9200 can play any game. I don't know if I
This is an obvious troll....I assumed the first question was legit...he's
also trolling on the nvidia group.
 
Define any.

There are some games that are total non -starters - the ones that
demand a minimum of Shader model 3. (Spiderman 3 for example). And
there are a whole host of games that will not be playable due to an
insufficient frame rate. I doubt you could play Half Life 2, or Gears
of War or any new game even at low resolutions.

I wouldn't try any DX10 games on a 9200, it just won't be enough.

Some of us demand certain resolutions - I run some 2 year old games
at 1600 x1200 resolution (Battlefield 2) on an X850 XT - a card that 4
years ago was the fastest thing ATI made. But I know if I went to run
a DX10 game I would have to dramatically drop the resolution. My card
won't run Spiderman 3 either by the way.

James- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Click to expand...


I don't know if it is more enjoy or fun to play 1600 resolution or I
don't know if I ever
need 1600 resolution display.
 
Red Cloud said:
I don't know if it is more enjoy or fun to play 1600 resolution or I
don't know if I ever
need 1600 resolution display.
Click to expand...

Then, stick to your $50 card.
 
Back
Top