Ati 4850 or Nvidia 8800\9600GT?

[aaabb]

which of them better for use Pcsx2 in good speed?
(On e8400 cpu)

[John_E]

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/atiradeonhd4870_062408145208/17130.png
Taking that into consideration, HD4850 all the way, plus it's even cheaper.
If you got enough money, a HD4870 would be the best choice, but idk whats the behavior of those under the PCSX2 plugins, anyone?

[RPGW1ZaRD]

PC game usage wise HD4850 would be the obvious choice but for PSCX2 I don't know really seeing how many people have reported performance issues with the GSdx plugin with HD4xxx cards, dunno if the problem has gotten solved or not though.

[Noja87]

What the...does SLI really doubles the 8800 GT performance? i thought Sli was a waste of time and money =|

[aaabb]

ok so who know whice better?

[ryllian]

What the...does SLI really doubles the 8800 GT performance? i thought Sli was a waste of time and money =|
That was back when SLI just came out, drivers, chipsets and other stuff have improved i guess.

ok so who know whice better?
4850 is better, but not for PCSX2. However, 8800gt is cheaper by like 40$ here, and it runs PC games fine as well (i never really bothered about maxing out fps in PC games as long as its a solid 40ish, can't really tell the difference after 50fps if you ask me). Its up to your budget i guess, and whether you plan to be playing pc games or pcsx more.

[John_E]

Well, that's right, the chooce most depend on the mix of games you're gonna play.
If you mind playing PC games and PCSX2, i'd suggest you to go with the HD4850, it should perform 40% faster in PC games (COD4,GRiD, etc), but really i dont know how it works in the PCSX2.
Anyways, it's up to AMD to release better drivers for the HD4850, wich could fix a probably poor perfomance in this program (?), indeed, there are just 1 official driver for the ATI's new series of GPUs.

In few words: HD4850

[Bubbafat]

Yeah the 48xx series looks smokin. Is slightly dissapointing no pcsx2 though.

Maybe sony is working with Ati/amd to rule out pcsx2 :evil:

[Chaos_Blader]

4850, but if you have some cash and time I would wait for 4870X2

What the...does SLI really doubles the 8800 GT performance? i thought Sli was a waste of time and money =|

The game takes advantage of Dual GPUs = faster performance. The 9800GX2 is at the top with 100fps but for most other games it would be average.

[NexXxus]

What the...does SLI really doubles the 8800 GT performance? i thought Sli was a waste of time and money =|

yes it increase performance in SLI optimized games and programs,
GSdx is not SLI optimized, so no improvement.

[aaabb]

9800gtx + will be better?
cause its cost more 20 $ and its seems better then the 4850 even for pc games(more colder)

[Tsuska]

Well...i as said many times b4, i dunno if they've fixed the problem with AMD cards yet with the new drivers....

But from experience Nvidia works better for pcsx2. I'd recommend the 9600GT over 8800GT at the moment but...as u can see i only have a weak/old 8600gts....so umm yea...

Prices will depends on where u buy it. Like shady asian shop, internet/ebay or david jones...lol

[aaabb]

maybe ill see no change in 9600/8800 gt against 4850 on pc games like crysis ...
i have a 19 CRT monitor so dont know which to choose

[gravaman]

I would go for the Radeon HD4850 its better than the GeForce 9800GTX+ in almost all benchmarks.
I recently bought a 4850 so im going to test it with the latest PCSX2 and post my results.

[tiki]

Get a new monitor before your video card.

Newegg.com - Acer AL2216Wbd Black 22" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP support 300 cd/m2 700:1 - LCD Monitors (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009094)

or if you have more money

Newegg.com - SAMSUNG 2253BW Black 22" 2ms(GTG) DVI Widescreen LCD Monitor with HDCP Support 300 cd/m2 DC 8000:1 - LCD Monitors (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001268)

It'll feel like you have a different computer

[aaabb]

dident see your message ,but in a regular screen,mag 19 " crt
the 4850 will look best like on lcd?
cause i prefere to buy Xbox 360 and connect it to the lcd if ill need to change my screen to lcd:(

[Chaos_Blader]

Get a new monitor before your video card.


That doesn't make much sense. What if he can't afford the card after the monitor.

Enjoy gaming at 800x600, on a 22"

[Metherlance]

That doesn't make much sense. What if he can't afford the card after the monitor.

Enjoy gaming at 800x600, on a 22"

Monitor technology doesn't change much, and GPU tech does. If you buy a $300 card now and then wait 6 months to buy a $200 monitor, thats $500. If you buy the $200 monitor now, the same GPU would cost $120, thats $320. Monitor prices don't change all that much and a good monitor will last you 5 years, where a good GPU will last you 1, maybe 2 if you don't mind crappy graphics near the end of it's life.
That's why it makes sense to buy it that way.

[ryllian]

Monitor technology doesn't change much, and GPU tech does. If you buy a $300 card now and then wait 6 months to buy a $200 monitor, thats $500. If you buy the $200 monitor now, the same GPU would cost $120, thats $320. Monitor prices don't change all that much and a good monitor will last you 5 years, where a good GPU will last you 1, maybe 2 if you don't mind crappy graphics near the end of it's life.
That's why it makes sense to buy it that way.
So basically your assuming that the basic rule of supply and demand only applies to monitors? a 500$ 22" monitor a year ago costs about 300$ now, its the same concept, if people buy lots of it, the prices drop. Thats why workstation graphics cards still cost 1,800$ a piece compared to perhaps 700$ for a high end gaming card with higher specs (yes i know workstation graphics have more support for OpenGL and whatnot, but thats hardly gonna cost the extra 1000$ or so), because there is more demand for the latter. Monitor prices simply drop a bit slower, since people replace graphics cards more often than monitors.

What would he do with a nice monitor now anyways? play solitaire at 800x600 and wait half a year for the price to drop? He could just buy a decent card now for 200$ and wait for a xmas sale to pick up a nice cheap 20" monitor for 100$.

Btw, at least have the sense to read up some info before you pull crap out of nowhere; The average PCI-E card has a life expectancy of 10 years, and a 4850 or 8800gt will play all new releases on at least medium setting for at least the next year or 2 (as of 2008, i have yet to find a game that my GT struggles with on High settings). Actually, I even have an ancient (from 2003) geforce 4 mx440 64bit AGP card, and it still runs fine, hell, it can even play half life 2 on medium settings. Sure i can't cluster***** noobs on crysis with that card, but its still solid and reliable for a card that hails from the old days when GPUs had only a tiny lil heatsink strapped onto them for cooling.

[aaabb]

so it looks like 9600 gt will be enough for me a lot cheaper and ill stay with the crt.
it can run crysis on high?

[ryllian]

so it looks like 9600 gt will be enough for me a lot cheaper and ill stay with the crt.
it can run crysis on high?
Depends on what resolution, but AA will definitely be impossible with that card on crysis. A 8800gt gets roughly 35ish fps with 4x AA at 1024x768 with all high settings, but im not so sure about a 9600. If you have the money, buy a decent 9800/8800 series card or the 4850, both are great for their value.

[Serret]

From the cheap cards, I'd get a 8800GT. It has excellent performance for it's price, and it's not a big leap in price from the 9600GT which is lower in performance.

As for the HD4850, I'd get one of those right now if I wanted a new graphics card. It's a high performance card on a really low price.

Basically if you want something cheap I'd get a 8800gt atm, it's a good deal. If you have the normal amount of money one would spend on a video card, I'd definitely get a HD4850. It's a high performance card on a very low price.

[PCXL-Fan]

So basically your assuming that the basic rule of supply and demand only applies to monitors? a 500$ 22" monitor a year ago costs about 300$ now, its the same concept, if people buy lots of it, the prices drop. Thats why workstation graphics cards still cost 1,800$ a piece compared to perhaps 700$ for a high end gaming card with higher specs (yes i know workstation graphics have more support for OpenGL and whatnot, but thats hardly gonna cost the extra 1000$ or so), because there is more demand for the latter. Monitor prices simply drop a bit slower, since people replace graphics cards more often than monitors.

What would he do with a nice monitor now anyways? play solitaire at 800x600 and wait half a year for the price to drop? He could just buy a decent card now for 200$ and wait for a xmas sale to pick up a nice cheap 20" monitor for 100$.


Those really cheap christmas special 20 inch monitors will be of the lowest quality and some chinese brand. Also $100 is stretching it. 20 inchers won't be that low. The LCD have gone through some significant price drops in the past couple years, but i think for computer monitors at least they are starting to plateau. Good quality 20inch computer monitors will never be 100 dollars.


Actually, I even have an ancient (from 2003) geforce 4 mx440 64bit AGP card, and it still runs fine, hell, it can even play half life 2 on medium settings. Sure i can't cluster***** noobs on crysis with that card, but its still solid and reliable for a card that hails from the old days when GPUs had only a tiny lil heatsink strapped onto them for cooling.

Sure you point out 1 of a small portion of recent games that run okay, but most of the recent games particularily the games which are 360 and ps3 ports won't run fine or at all.

Luckily your statement will hold fairly true of he gets a 4850 or a 8800GT. Since most pc games in the now and in future will be created synonymously on the consoles they will have graphics that 8800GT can handle with relative ease. And despite developers perhaps being able to tap into the consoles better in the future, this won't translate to a drastic increase in hardware requirements on computers. The 8800GT will be capable of handling all the console ports beautifully probably till they final retire them years from now.

[Squall-Leonhart]

the problem with the ATI cards is probably the same problem that effects Petes OGL2 plugin, when the memory isn't specified it slows down alot.

[Serret]

it could be a recent driver issue as well. does everyone with an hd4850 have that problem?

[runawayprisoner]

Just debunked that one a while ago. PCSX2 is performing happily with HD 4870 here. GSDX seems to only cause performance issues when the CPU is extremely weak... (for those who know me, this is a simple term... as the technical details behind this can kill brains... :p)
A 45nm quad-core at 3.6GHz would suffice. ;) (Oh wait... QUAD??? Yeah... quad...)

P.S.: This marks the FIRST time EVER that a quad-core is useful in PCSX2... no joke.

[Squall-Leonhart]

good to know.

Now if only ATI would hire mudlord, so they could actually release a decent OpenGL ICD, with more then 130 Extensions.

[runawayprisoner]

Indeedy... Lifeforce by ASD still doesn't work... and I want to watch that demo again so bad...
Ironically, everything else works.

[Demi Fiend]

Geez.. Buy the Video card. Buy the best you can ! So you don't have to spend money again on a vga so soon. ;)

Don't go wasting your money on monitors. I have a 15" CRT monitor and I'm damn happy with it. :lol:

[NinjaOptimus]

go for the 4850, its giving u the best performance per $
although, if you could afford, then ofcourse go for the best available gfx card. just my 0.02$

[pigfaced]

go for the 4850, its giving u the best performance per $


Actually that's no longer the case with Nvidia releasing the renamed 9800 GT (which is identical to the 8800 with the addition of tri-SLI) with a lower retail price than the card it's replacing. The 9800 GT is being offered by two UK based etailers for £87 and the prices start at £95 from most other places. The 4850's prices start at £115, however I get the feeling that they may well drop a bit over the next month or two.

[Smokedrank911]

wow cool

[gllt]

I think GS is lower end than GT but I could be wrong..

Sorry that's the only input I have, it's kind of negative sounding.

Maybe someone else can say better things!

[runawayprisoner]

9800GT is still slower than HD 4850 by a good margin. HD 4850 is as fast as, or even faster than, the regular 9800GTX. So there really is no contest here. If you can, though, opt for a HD 4870, and you won't have to worry about performance for at least a year.

And here's how it works for GeForce naming convention: Ultra > GTX > GTS > GT > GS

[gllt]

OT; I'm buying a 8800 GT instead of a 9600 GSO, I absolutely am making the right choice? 800 > 600 and GT > GSO.
OnT; Go for the 8800 GT I'd say.

[weilin37]

i have a HD 4850 and it runs crysis at very high with no noticeable lag. the HD 4850 runs hot though, so make sure you buy one that includes a nice heatsink. I can refer one to you: Newegg.com - MSI R4850-512M Radeon HD 4850 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Desktop Graphics / Video Cards (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127370)

In games, the HD 4850 runs faster than either of the cards.

the 8800GT and HD 4850 have roughly the same price/performance so either one is a good deal, the HD 4850 just has newer technology that may help in future drivers.

[gllt]

If my two motherboards supported PCI-E 2.0 I would fit one with one of those but mine are both 1.0 :V However that doesn't prevent me from simply buying another motherboard but oh woes, I already have two unbuilt computers on my hands and needing 551 dollars to build the first one just so I can sell it to build the second one for a little over 1000 dollars. Last thing I need is more.

But I just read that card works fine with PCSX2 if you have a quad core so it can have its own processing power. So if you get that, get a quad. If you get 8800 GT, get a dual.

[ryllian]

Those really cheap christmas special 20 inch monitors will be of the lowest quality and some chinese brand. Also $100 is stretching it. 20 inchers won't be that low. The LCD have gone through some significant price drops in the past couple years, but i think for computer monitors at least they are starting to plateau. Good quality 20inch computer monitors will never be 100 dollars.
Depends what country your in, over here i can buy a nice AOC 20" screen for 120$ stock prices easily. Sure its not Sony or Samsung, but from my own experience, the "cheap chinese" brands are just as reliable as their counterparts, its just that when they break, people whine about how its cheap instead of even stopping to think if it might've been their own misuse. Plus where do you think all the "quality" american brands base their actual factories in? If you open up a cheap ChiMei LCD and compare it with a more expensive Phillips/Sony/Panasonic one (exact same contrast ratio, response time etc etc), most of them will use identical LCD controller chips and whatnot (made in either taiwan or some other cheap labour & factory license country no doubt). Hell, just cause its cheap doesn't mean it wont be as good, just pry the asian brand name off and slap a Dell logo or something over it if it makes you feel uncomfortable.

Sure you point out 1 of a small portion of recent games that run okay, but most of the recent games particularily the games which are 360 and ps3 ports won't run fine or at all.

Luckily your statement will hold fairly true of he gets a 4850 or a 8800GT. Since most pc games in the now and in future will be created synonymously on the consoles they will have graphics that 8800GT can handle with relative ease. And despite developers perhaps being able to tap into the consoles better in the future, this won't translate to a drastic increase in hardware requirements on computers. The 8800GT will be capable of handling all the console ports beautifully probably till they final retire them years from now.

I specifically said my old geforce mx wouldn't handle any recent games (HL2 is like...2 years old now? I forget). I was just using it as an example of how a card doesn't die out and become useless after 1-2years as the other poster indicated, not as an example of how ancient hardware can play next gen games. I know how fast graphics hardware gets outdated, but that doesn't mean it'll stop functioning after just a year or so of use.

On a sidenote, ps3/xbox360 ports so far have been complete crap. Bought Gears of War last xmas, and months later, Epic still hasn't fixed the stuttering issue. Also bought assassin's creed recently, which has awesome gameplay and graphics, but having to click 11 buttons just to exit the game is pretty much just mocking people with carpal tunnel, as well as sound issues which require hardware acceleration to be turned off before play. Apparently Mass Effect and some other next gen ports work well, but I'm too put off by gears and AC to even spend the money anymore.

If my two motherboards supported PCI-E 2.0 I would fit one with one of those but mine are both 1.0 :V However that doesn't prevent me from simply buying another motherboard but oh woes, I already have two unbuilt computers on my hands and needing 551 dollars to build the first one just so I can sell it to build the second one for a little over 1000 dollars. Last thing I need is more.

You could always just sell the parts to a computer shop? I think it would be rather hard selling a custom built PC unless it was to a friend, since most people would rather just buy a custom built one from a shop than from a random person on ebay.

[cyberfish]

I made a similar decision a month or so ago. With the 9600 GT at $110 and 4850 at $175, I think it's needless to say that 4850 will perform better.

I went with the 9600 GT without hesitation, though. ATI doesn't spend money making a decent Linux driver, while NVIDIA has state of art Linux drivers. Fair enough, as a result, ATI loses Linux-using customers like myself. I have been exclusively NVIDIA since GeForce FX or so.

If you only use Windows, though, both seems like good choices. I would personally still go for the 9600, as the price premium is too big for a little bit of performance. It's the first time a midrange card gets 256-bit memory bus, too :beer:.

[massec]

I have a 9600gt and a 19" monitor at 1440x900. I can run all my games at high settings(The Witcher, WoW, GW, Sins of a Solar empire, bf2), granted they arn't the most modern or graphics intensive games, but most people don't play all the very newest games.

And on the subject of SLi, he 9XXX, specificly the 9600gt performs very very well in SLi. I think its around an 80% increase in performance.

[FireFLower]

Someone mentioned GF 4 MX420 64MB here right? Oh yeah It is a card that is able to handle Half Life 2 graphic engine with medium settings useing 800x600 resolution.

Okay just as a tip for you newbies here who still might have that. THAT CARD IS NUTS! I put 100% bigger clocks (GPU 250 --> 440, Memory 166 --> 390 I think if I remember right. and it works greatly! I tested it with 3Dmark01, Frets on Fire, Audiosurf and Ati Tool 0.26 3D heater. Btw mine is passive cooled ;)

Well back to subject. Ati 4850 is way more powerful than at this moment Nvidia 8800GT or 9600GT. Actually 8800GT and 9600GT are kinda similar product. Only big difference is 55nm process instead 65nm process. But Ati 4850 is more powerful than current 9600GT. It is much cheaper than GTX 260 but GTX 260 is just a bit more powerful. HD4870 again then is nuts too or if you have seen reviews of GTX 280 killer. HD4870x2 it is really a long awaited product from ATI =)

[aaabb]

ok so everyone agreed that 4850 is great for pc games.
but if i cant run pcsx2 on it is too bad:(
you cant allways get what u want:(

[gravaman]

I recently sold my GeForce 8800gt and bought a Radeon HD4850 and I can attest that the new ATI card is way better at PC games AND PCSX2.

I tried the new 1.9 GSdx9 and works great in Resident Evil 4, much faster than before.

I think the idea that ATI sucks at drivers is really old and just not true anymore. The new ATI cards rock. If you want PCSX2 or PC games I really would stand by either the Radeon 4850 or 4870 if you have more money.

[PCXL-Fan]

I recently sold my GeForce 8800gt and bought a Radeon HD4850 and I can attest that the new ATI card is way better at PC games AND PCSX2.

I tried the new 1.9 GSdx9 and works great in Resident Evil 4, much faster than before.

I think the idea that ATI sucks at drivers is really old and just not true anymore. The new ATI cards rock. If you want PCSX2 or PC games I really would stand by either the Radeon 4850 or 4870 if you have more money.

what cpu do you have? A quadcore or a dual core? AMD or Intel. I've heard that the 4xxx series has problems when on dual cores and not quad cores. I'd just like to re confirm that. A number of people on the forum posted about having troubles with their HD4xxx cards. I'm thinking they all had dualcores.

And have you experienced great performance on other games besides res4?

What driver version are you using?

[gravaman]

what cpu do you have? A quadcore or a dual core? AMD or Intel. I've heard that the 4xxx series has problems when on dual cores and not quad cores. I'd just like to re confirm that. A number of people on the forum posted about having troubles with their HD4xxx cards. I'm thinking they all had dualcores.

And have you experienced great performance on other games besides res4?

What driver version are you using?

Im running a Core 2 dual core E6400 at 2.13 GHz. It runs all games I tried better than when I was using the 8800GT. No problems yet, though i should try to overclock the CPU to get some extra mileage.

Im using the latest Catalyst 8.7 drivers.

[weilin37]

I would personally still go for the 9600, as the price premium is too big for a little bit of performance.

Uh...for crysis the HD 4850 gets 10 more fps average. for every other game it ranges from 20-60 more fps. The performance difference is huge. The 9600 doesn't compare with the HD 4850. The HD 4850 also has the best price/performance ratio, one that matches the 8800GT. Also with catalyst 8.8 coming out, the wattage usage is supposed to go down about 20 watts! The 9600 drivers are already established, while the HD 4850 is only improving with new drivers.

Right now you can get one at 150 dollars with rebate. If you opt for one with a better cooler (cools down to 38C idle, 50 load for me!) its 170 dollars. The 9600GT SLI matches the 3870X2, but the HD 4850 beats the 3870X2, you do the math.

Surely you dont just want to focus on the pcsx2. If you do, both cards will be enough. PCSX2 matters more in cpu speed than gpu. You definetely, however, won't be playing games at full speed 2 years in the future with the 9600. I'd say spend the extra 40 dollars and get the HD4850. It's like what, 4 hours of work? The 9600 is quickly getting old.

I have the card and with my overclocked 3.7ghz E8400 wolfdale, I can play tenkaichi 3 at full speed even on two player split screen on the gsdx 1.9

In summary, getting the 9600GT will only be a waste of money, seeing how the HD 4850 isn't that much more expensive.

Now if you really can't afford it, then getting the 8800GT will be better than a 9600GT.

[Squall-Leonhart]

I have a 9600gt and a 19" monitor at 1440x900. I can run all my games at high settings(The Witcher, WoW, GW, Sins of a Solar empire, bf2), granted they arn't the most modern or graphics intensive games, but most people don't play all the very newest games.

And on the subject of SLi, he 9XXX, specificly the 9600gt performs very very well in SLi. I think its around an 80% increase in performance.

Most of the scaling problems SLI once had are gone, its up to about 95% now.

[ryllian]

I have the card and with my overclocked 3.7ghz E8400 wolfdale, I can play tenkaichi 3 at full speed even on two player split screen on the gsdx 1.9

In summary, getting the 9600GT will only be a waste of money, seeing how the HD 4850 isn't that much more expensive.

Now if you really can't afford it, then getting the 8800GT will be better than a 9600GT.

That's because gsdx uses the CPU way more than the GPU. My temperatures for both cores of my CPU max out to 40C whereas my GPU barely rises 2C, and unless gsdx gets a major revamp, the graphics card won't really matter so much unless you play at doubled resolutions. True, the HD 4850 is a much better card, but that doesn't mean it'll be any less obsolete in a few years than any other recent card.

Okay just as a tip for you newbies here who still might have that. THAT CARD IS NUTS! I put 100% bigger clocks (GPU 250 --> 440, Memory 166 --> 390 I think if I remember right. and it works greatly! I tested it with 3Dmark01, Frets on Fire, Audiosurf and Ati Tool 0.26 3D heater. Btw mine is passive cooled

Lol i pushed mine about 50% by strapping one of my spare asus northbridge coolers onto the tiny heatsink. It was a fairly solid card, and if it wasn't for the 64mb frame buffer, it would've performed better than my radeon 9550 (though that could've just been due to the drivers, since back then the catalyst drivers and ccc hogged a ****load of resources).

[weilin37]

That's because gsdx uses the CPU way more than the GPU. My temperatures for both cores of my CPU max out to 40C whereas my GPU barely rises 2C, and unless gsdx gets a major revamp, the graphics card won't really matter so much unless you play at doubled resolutions. True, the HD 4850 is a much better card, but that doesn't mean it'll be any less obsolete in a few years than any other recent card.

Yes, I did mention pcsx2 uses more cpu. Either of the cards would be fine for the emulator. But it really doesn't make sense to not spend only 40 more dollars for much more performance, not to mention the potential drivers can offer.

[amc76]

To answer your questions I have an ati hd4850 and it works great on games. The games I've tried so far are Final Fantasy X and Resident Evil Code Veronica X. 50 (locked) fps all the time.

This beauty along with a q6600 @ 3.0ghz => killer computer :D