I recently got myself a new monitor (24" 1920x1080) which I now use in parallel with my old monitor (17" 1280x1024) meaning I have a nice 3200x1080 display.
For all these years, I've been using an E6600 (OCed to 2.67GHz) with 2GB of DDR2 RAM (960MHz) and a MSI NViDIA GeForce 7600 GS with 256MB GDDR(2/3) RAM.

I mention my approximate system specs because ever since I added this second mon back in November, using applications like Photoshop really aren't fun. I can play 1080p movies fine thanks to my processor and a bit of settings on my MPC-HC but Photoshop and some basicish games that I play suck.

My graphics card was not that great when I got it around 3 or so years back and it's been utter shit for a while barely letting me play most games at low quality. But the one game I used to play regularly (Fifa 10) doesn't run well on my new resolution and that coupled with other things such as Photoshop being a bitch makes me consider getting a new graphics card.

I should mention I'm on a budget. I've not decided how much it is but I'd like it to have good VFM (Value for Money) and should be one that would last me a couple of years at least (not necessarily for the absolute high end games at the highest resolution in the future.. but should at least let me enjoy them at lower qualities 2 years down the line).

If anyone has any suggestions, please let me know

I've made this thread because I haven't looked at any graphics card in years and thought it'd be good to get some input. Also, I'm assuming that my problem is my graphics card (for Photoshop framing) and if anyone thinks otherwise, let me know.

Update: My motherboard is a P5-KPLE. It doesn't have SLI/Crossfire so don't even think about that Single PCI-e 16x slot.

You can't go wrong with an Nvidia 9800gt. It's not a high end card, but  it's still an excellent. It can play most PC games on max settings and could continue playing most new games on max settings for the next 3 years.

Also it isn't very expensive. I have one at the moment, and i play alot of games.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
You can't go wrong with an Nvidia 9800gt. It's not a high end card, but  it's still an excellent. It can play most PC games on max and could continue playing most new games on max settings for the next 3 years.

Also it isn't very expensive.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
You can't go wrong with an Nvidia 9800gt. It's not a high end card, but  it's still an excellent. It can play most PC games on max and could continue playing most new games on max settings for the next 3 years.

Also it isn't very expensive.

---

I thought the 9800GT was "old". I saw it in the market a couple of months back and it seemed cheapish (6K INR-ish)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
I don't know what 6K INR is equivalent to in my money I can pick up a 9800gt for around $120 dollars.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Edit: It would really help if you gave a brief estimate on how much you could spend

---

Honestly ATI is ahead in the graphics cards right now. I have a 4850 myself, the whole 4800 series is fine. ncix lists the current price at $135 CAD (just under 6k INR). I have the XFX 4850 with dual LCD's running at 1280x1024 (fullscreen ftw) and can run all the games I've tried at full graphics spec, and then some.

If you want something newer, look at the 5700 series.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MeEtc
Honestly ATI is ahead in the graphics cards right now. I have a 4850 myself, the whole 4800 series is fine. ncix lists the current price at $135 CAD (just under 6k INR). I have the XFX 4850 with dual LCD's running at 1280x1024 (fullscreen ftw) and can run all the games I've tried at full graphics spec, and then some.

If you want something newer, look at the 5700 series.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
I don't know what 6K INR is equivalent to in my money I can pick up a 9800gt for around $120 dollars.

---

Lazy.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Edit: It would really help if you gave a brief estimate on how much you could spend

---

Depends. I don't have a fixed budget. Limiting concern is my conscience I'd say 12K INR would be the absolute max but tbh, I would like to avoid spending more than 8K INR if I can (ie anything above it would need real good justification).

---

i suggest the 9800gt, i have one (the asus ultimate one... so its overclocked by default compared to others) and i run dual monitors, and games like call of duty 6 on max (no aa, you dont need it at 1080p) with no problems (well i do disable the second monitor... which does give a speed boost).. and actually i say that i get ~80fps in multiplayer games of cod6

i would never go ATI, i just dont like them... and i have found that they are only really good for having AA in games... which when running at full 1080p is not noticeable really.

another card that you might want to go for is a nvidia 260, they are a good card and should run great for a few years. you can get one of them here in aus for 239 (thats just the first one i found... so could be cheaper) which is ~10k INR.

edit: or as discrate said, the 250 is also an alright card

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
i suggest the 9800gt, i have one (the asus ultimate one... so its overclocked by default compared to others) and i run dual monitors, and games like call of duty 6 on max (no aa, you dont need it at 1080p) with no problems (well i do disable the second monitor... which does give a speed boost).. and actually i say that i get ~80fps in multiplayer games of cod6

i would never go ATI, i just dont like them... and i have found that they are only really good for having AA in games... which when running at full 1080p is not noticeable really.

another card that you might want to go for is a nvidia 260, they are a good card and should run great for a few years. you can get one of them here in aus for 239 (thats just the first one i found... so could be cheaper) which is ~10k INR.

edit: or as discrate said, the 250 is also an alright card

---

If you want a new card, get an ATI. As much of an nVidia fanboy as I am, ATI got it right with the latest generation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vilkku
If you want a new card, get an ATI. As much of an nVidia fanboy as I am, ATI got it right with the latest generation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Yeh, i just compared the 9800gt and the GTX 250 on the Nvidia website. the GTX250 is slightly better then the 9800gt, so he might aswell get it since he has enough money.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Yeh, i just compared the 9800gt and the GTX 250 on the Nvidia website. the GTX250 is slightly better then the 9800gt, so he might aswell get it since he has enough money.

---

6k vs 10k for a slight difference? No way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Yeh, i just compared the 9800gt and the GTX 250 on the Nvidia website. the GTX250 is slightly better then the 9800gt, so he might aswell get it since he has enough money.

---

6k vs 10k for a slight difference? No way.

---

Goes a GTX10k costs 10k? ROFL. The prices are rubbish in your country.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Yeh, i just compared the 9800gt and the GTX 250 on the Nvidia website. the GTX250 is slightly better then the 9800gt, so he might aswell get it since he has enough money.

---

6k vs 10k for a slight difference? No way.

---

Goes a GTX10k costs 10k? ROFL. The prices are rubbish in your country.

---

I thought you quoted those. I haven't asked for the prices yet

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Anyway i originally said get the 9800gt which is very cheap and then i said if you have up to 8k to spend you might aswell get the GTX250. It's better then the 9800GT

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
Anyway i originally said get the 9800gt which is very cheap and then i said if you have up to 8k to spend you might aswell get the GTX250. It's better then the 9800GT

---

I'll try getting the exact prices here in a while. I think the 9800GT by XFX is around 6-6.5K. If the GTX250 is <8.5K, I'll get it. If not, I'll think about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
But the cards over there are probs more expensive.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
ATI is ahead right now with there high end GPU that costs like 500 dollars. He doesn't want a very expensive high end GPU. Nvidia shits all over ATI.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by davidpolitis

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
ATI is ahead right now with there high end GPU that costs like 500 dollars. He doesn't want a very expensive high end GPU. Nvidia shits all over ATI.

---

NVIDIA cards atm aren't even built for DX11 and not all of the good ATI cards are expensive. The 5770 I can buy for $189-$205 (AUD).

---

you cannot compare different generations of graphics cards... you have to wait for the latest of nvidia before you compare the new ATI... and as discrate said (well not as much detail) 512 cores > 1 core... and also C++ coding on GPU *drools*

and so what about DX11 ? games are built to be backwards compatible unless they are DX specific. also with what JA wants to do with the graphics card... DX9 would be plenty for it even, no point in DX11.

and as i have already said, ATI are only good for Anti Aliasing, which when running at 1080p doesnt do shit!

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
you cannot compare different generations of graphics cards... you have to wait for the latest of nvidia before you compare the new ATI... and as discrate said (well not as much detail) 512 cores > 1 core... and also C++ coding on GPU *drools*

and so what about DX11 ? games are built to be backwards compatible unless they are DX specific. also with what JA wants to do with the graphics card... DX9 would be plenty for it even, no point in DX11.

and as i have already said, ATI are only good for Anti Aliasing, which when running at 1080p doesnt do shit!

---

For that money you'll want a 5770. It's £130 in Britain, but that's with our stupid prices, I don't know what it'll be like in India. This ATI card "shits all over" the 9800GT being recommended here, it might be more expensive, but it's not a big deal. If you can get a 5850 (I paid £199, it seems to have gone up to £240...) in your budget then that's where you should go. This is the card I have, it's better than the GTX260 I used to use.

The 5000 series seeing as it is a new architecture is going to be around for a while. You're welcome to wait for nVidia's Fermi to come out, but if it's anything like the GTX200 series release then the cards will be rather expensive (at least, out of your budget).

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13

The 5000 series seeing as it is a new architecture is going to be around for a while. You're welcome to wait for nVidia's Fermi to come out, but if it's anything like the GTX200 series release then the cards will be rather expensive (at least, out of your budget).

---

andrewdodd13, how much is a 9800GT in £?

Around £70-80 from a quick search

thats almost 1/2 price... of course the other cards are going to outdo the 9800...

did you even read what i said before:

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
you cannot compare different generations of graphics cards...

---

The 5750 should cost only a little bit more than the 1GB 9800GT and apparently outperforms it. Plus, Eyefinity is nice for multiple monitor setups.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
thats almost 1/2 price... of course the other cards are going to outdo the 9800...

did you even read what i said before:

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
you cannot compare different generations of graphics cards...

---

and yes, you may have compared it to both... but you compared a 5850 (which is a fairly high card in ATI) to a GTX260... they may be close but what you should be comparing to is a 280 or 285... which is a fair difference in power...

so please, when you do comparisons, do it right!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13

The 5000 series seeing as it is a new architecture is going to be around for a while. You're welcome to wait for nVidia's Fermi to come out, but if it's anything like the GTX200 series release then the cards will be rather expensive (at least, out of your budget).

---

He doesn't want nor need a high end card though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
A 9800GT will scrape through at 1920x1080 with AA on current games

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
A 9800GT will scrape through at 1920x1080 with AA on current games

---

im getting 80fps on mw2... thats not scraping... and thats without overclocking... this card will last for about 3 more years... yes by then it will be down to about 20-40fps for the higher end of games, but as JA said, he doesnt play those sorts of game... just low to mid end games.

and I played for about 2 years with a 6200 (this was 2 years ago), the games i that i was playing: CS: S, TF2, etc (mainly valve games). On lowest graphics i was playing at 15-20FPS... which was still reasonable to play with because i would often be up near the top of multiplayer games.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
thats almost 1/2 price... of course the other cards are going to outdo the 9800...

did you even read what i said before:

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
you cannot compare different generations of graphics cards...

---

and yes, you may have compared it to both... but you compared a 5850 (which is a fairly high card in ATI) to a GTX260... they may be close but what you should be comparing to is a 280 or 285... which is a fair difference in power...

so please, when you do comparisons, do it right!

---

Actually the GTX285 also gets beat in certain games (source) and is currently poking around £320, but I never had one of these cards so I couldn't comment from my point of view. However, the GTX285 is definitely going to be out of JA's scope.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13

The 5000 series seeing as it is a new architecture is going to be around for a while. You're welcome to wait for nVidia's Fermi to come out, but if it's anything like the GTX200 series release then the cards will be rather expensive (at least, out of your budget).

---

He doesn't want nor need a high end card though.

---

But he did say he wants it to last for a long time. A 9800GT will scrape through at 1920x1080 with AA on current games (especially seeing as it's just a remap of the 8800GT - which has been out for over two years now), but not for long.

The 5770 will survive for much longer, seeing as it has just been released and has a very good price-to-performance ratio. The 5850 will maybe last that bit longer due to its extra power.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
A 9800GT will scrape through at 1920x1080 with AA on current games

---

im getting 80fps on mw2... thats not scraping... and thats without overclocking... this card will last for about 3 more years... yes by then it will be down to about 20-40fps for the higher end of games, but as JA said, he doesnt play those sorts of game... just low to mid end games.

and I played for about 2 years with a 6200 (this was 2 years ago), the games i that i was playing: CS: S, TF2, etc (mainly valve games). On lowest graphics i was playing at 15-20FPS... which was still reasonable to play with because i would often be up near the top of multiplayer games.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Discrate
You are still comparing 2 different generation cards.

---

i run my game on: max, except AA/AF, they are pointless when in the heat of battle... makes no difference... sure for Crysis they make it look a bit better... Phillip, who has been playing FPS games and everything for MANY years now, and who also knows quite a lot with hardware says that at anything above 1920x1080, AA is barely noticeable and not needed.

also i run with a 21" screen, so it looks clearer no matter what... and are you sure that you are the correct distance from the screen from the 30"?

and that review is just pointless, they should do tests without AA to show you how good the nvidias pwnage is over ATI...

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
i run my game on: max, except AA/AF, they are pointless when in the heat of battle... makes no difference... sure for Crysis they make it look a bit better... Phillip, who has been playing FPS games and everything for MANY years now, and who also knows quite a lot with hardware says that at anything above 1920x1080, AA is barely noticeable and not needed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NanaFreak
and that review is just pointless, they should do tests without AA to show you how good the nvidias pwnage is over ATI...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
Half Life 2 it's clearly visible. The resolution of the screenshot is irrelevant as you're viewing it on your high resolution monitor.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
You're making a slightly cyclical argument here as there's little difference to having the game on low and on high "in the heat of the battle". AF is clearly noticable on textures, at an resolution, and I run it at 16x on all games. Here's a demonstration.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blessedguy

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
Half Life 2 it's clearly visible. The resolution of the screenshot is irrelevant as you're viewing it on your high resolution monitor.

---

Hotlink blocked.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewdodd13
You're making a slightly cyclical argument here as there's little difference to having the game on low and on high "in the heat of the battle". AF is clearly noticable on textures, at an resolution, and I run it at 16x on all games. Here's a demonstration.

---

Sorry, but I can barely see a difference.

Also, he said he's on a budget and doesn't need a high-end card, and surely the ATi HD58xx series is one of them. 2 or 5fps more won't make anyone's life better, and drivers can always make them perform better.
Even my nVidia 8500GT is able to handle 1440x900 and 1920x1080 simultaneously, even when playing The Sims 3 on high detail. Sure, it's not like a "OMG-AMAZINGLY-FAST", but runs nicely and didn't make my computer's price skyrocket.

Don't get me wrong, but I really don't see the point of NEEDING to have more than 30fps and other details the human eye can't see.

---