23 replies to this topic

[AOXOMOXOA]

Hey guys,

Happy Thanksgiving!!

My son loves video games. I just build him a new computer Core i3 8 GB DDR3
but he needs a better video card, he has a Gforce 8400 GS

We were looking at the Newegg Black friday stuff and we find a

MSI R777-PMD1GD5 Radeon HD 7770 Ghz edition 1GB 128-bit fro $99 bucks, and then there is a $30 dollar rebate on top of that.

one of his buddy's told him that he should get a R7750. Now not being a gamer my self I would think that the 7770 would be a better card correct??

Is there a better card we should be looking at??

What is the best card? What would be a better Nvidia card? I have always had better luck with Nvidia drivers.

So please tell us what is up..

Thank you.

[Non-Active-Account]

To answer the OP. The 7770 is a great budget card and doesn't require a lot of wattage.

The closest nvidia card in that price range is the GTX 650. It looks like the 7770 out preforms.

http://www.hwcompare...radeon-hd-7770/

[+remixedcat]

Nvidia's driver's are more stable...


also I got my 650Ti at microcenter for 160.... not bad.... I can pretty much max skyrim at 1080p with no problems and my card stays pretty chill and stuff....

[Slammers]

i3 is a perfect CPU for a BUDGET built. i5 and 560 ti is mid range. My friend i3 system plays 95% of games EXACTLY the same as my i5 3470k system (we both have the same 660ti).

[+remixedcat]

and intel i3's are not crap... Intels outbench and outdo amd in media and gaming. amd is good for server and vm stuff but intel is the best for a/v encoding.... I can encode at 192x speed in dBpoweramp on my intel i5 3570K... it would max out at 52 on an equivalant amd quad. you would still hit 100x encoding in dbpoweramp with an i3.

[Ambroos]

I'd take a look at the GTX 650 just because it's nVidia. My latest experiences with ATi's drivers have been horrible, mainly because of the limited configuration options. nVidia cards are very versatile and have some nice features you won't get with ATi (like PhysX, CUDA and better 3D with glasses should you ever want that).

[Vvo]

The processor would be the bottleneck when running a higher end gfx but not all games are heavily dependent on cpu. I3 processors with hyper-threading is perfectly fine for those on a budget and adding a hd7770 or gtx650 makes the rig powerhouse for the cost-to-performance ratio.

[migo]

Windows 8 didn't play too nice with nVidia initially. Not sure how that is after launch. On a budget Radeons are always a better deal than a GeForce. Unfortunately $100 limits you to a 128-bit memory width, which basically puts you at the performance of a high end laptop GPU. 256-bit is what the consoles use, and based on benchmarks that's a big difference. Now if $100 is what you've got, then it's what you've got, but I'd try to find a way to get something like a 7850 instead.

[Muhammad Farrukh]

On topic, 650Ti is better and expensive than 7770. If you can find one, which is closely priced to 7770, then it will be awesome for almost every game.

[+Blank]

remixedcat, on 23 November 2012 - 02:11, said:

Nvidia's driver's are more stable...


also I got my 650Ti at microcenter for 160.... not bad.... I can pretty much max skyrim at 1080p with no problems and my card stays pretty chill and stuff....

same card, and i can play bf3 on native res, at high settings. but remember i believe we both got the evga superclocked verson, which is going to be faster and better than the normal 560.

i paid $300 for it when it first came out. since this is the card i use, and its the card on sale, i suggest ths one will play the most recent games on high or at least medium settings at native res.

[+remixedcat]

Yup it's a good card for the money since I paid 160.

muggerfugger, on 23 November 2012 - 12:43, said:

same card, and i can play bf3 on native res, at high settings. but remember i believe we both got the evga superclocked verson, which is going to be faster and better than the normal 560.

i paid $300 for it when it first came out. since this is the card i use, and its the card on sale, i suggest ths one will play the most recent games on high or at least medium settings at native res.

[RudeBoi]

As far as CPU vs GPU goes, it all depends on screen and game texture resolution. If you're on 1080p+, and running hd texture mods, then the GPU and its VRAM are going to be the bottlenecks. Conversely, if you're on a lower res screen and default game textures. then the only thing that's going to limit you is the CPU. But honestly, an i3 is pretty good for most games.

I'm building a new PC soon with an i5-3570k, 8GB DDR3 1600mhz, and a 9750 3GB VRAM, but that's only because I want to run Skyrim all tricked out with HD texture mods.

[+sanke1]

Hilarious replies in this thread.

But I would recommend to go for Nvidia card as AMD may go bust anytime and their drivers are still unstable in Windows 8.

[+Asik]

remixedcat, on 23 November 2012 - 02:11, said:

Nvidia's driver's are more stable...

I'm tired of hearing this unsubstantiated opinion stated as fact. As far I'm aware, this is nothing more than a tenacious myth. Go to nvidia's forums and you'll see plenty of people whining about plenty of problems with their drivers. Go to amd's forums and you'll see the same.

[+remixedcat]

I have both AMD/ATI and Nvidia cards.... my ATI drivers are constantly having issues. on windows server 2008R2, 7 and 8. Skyrim is unplayable on my ATI card and Fallout NV is as well...