Best PCIe Card: $120 To $200
Best PCIe Card For ~$130 : Tie
Good 1920x1200 performance in most games, some with lowered detail
| GeForce 9800 GTX+ / GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | G92 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 128 |
| Texture Units: | 64 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 738 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 1,100 (2,200 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10/SM 4.0 |
Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet? Sure, as long as the frame rates stay the same. Although the GeForce GTX 250 is a re-badged GeForce 9800 GTX+, the falling prices have kept this older, but still powerful graphics technology, very much in the game.
| Radeon HD 4850 | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | RV770 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 800 |
| Texture Units: | 40 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 625 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 993 (1,986 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10.1/SM 4.1 |
The Radeon HD 4850 hangs in there, competing with the GeForce 9800 GTX+ / GeForce GTS 250 twins at the same price point. Each card will claim some victories depending on how well it works with a particular graphics engine, but for the relatively low price of $130, neither will disappoint.
Best PCIe Card For ~$160: None
The $160 price range sports a number of attractive cards like the 1 GB Radeon HD 4850, the 1 GB GeForce GTS 250, and the Radeon 4870 512 MB. However, for an extra $25, it's hard not to recommend the upgrade to the 1 GB version of the Radeon HD 4870 or the GeForce GTX 260.
Best PCIe Card For ~$185: Tie
Good 1920x1200 performance
| Radeon HD 4870 1 GB | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | RV770 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 800 |
| Texture Units: | 40 |
| ROPs: | 16 |
| Memory Bus: | 256-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 750 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 900 (3,600 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10.1/SM 4.1 |
For about $25 more than the 512 MB version, you can have a full 1 GB of video memory on your Radeon HD 4870. While it's debatable how much the extra RAM accomplishes, it does help the Radeon HD 4870 keep pace with its close rival the GeForce GTX 260.
| GeForce GTX 260 (Core 216) | |
|---|---|
| Codename: | GT200 |
| Process: | 55 nm |
| Universal Shaders: | 216 |
| Texture Units: | 72 |
| ROPs: | 28 |
| Memory Bus: | 448-bit |
| Core Speed MHz: | 576 |
| Memory Speed MHz: | 999 (1,998 effective) |
| DirectX/Shader Model: | DX 10/SM 4.0 |
While these cards might not sport a full 1 GB of RAM like the Radeon HD 4870 does in the same price range, they do offer advantages in titles that run better on the GeForce GT200 architecture. Once again, a little diligence is required on the part of the buyer to find out which card is the best adapted for his or her favorite titles, and once again, whether or not the motherboard supports SLI or CrossFire. (Ed.: Check out our recent Radeon HD 4890 review, which has numbers for the 512 MB and 1 GB Radeon HD 4870s, along with the GeForce GTX 260 Core 216).
Note that we are recommending the newer Core 216 version of the GeForce GTX 260 instead of the older version with 192 shader processors, which is now becoming hard to find. Regardless, check the specifications of any card before you purchase.
I'm getting a little tired with the ongoing shift in focus of these articles - it's the best card for your money. That to me says "here are some price brackets, here are the best cards for each" not "you'd be stupid to spend this much money when you can go SLI for cheaper".
As a result, it's of no interest to me within the scope of this article that 2x 260GTXs in SLI are better value than a single 4870 X2 (especially as earlier on Mr. Woligroski couldn't justify a single 260GTX). Maybe I don't have SLI or Crossfire, maybe I'm interesting in buying half or third of a monster GPU rig now and doubling-up when the cards are cheaper. Maybe I'm even a moron with too much cash.
Similarly, perhaps all I have is $160 and simply cannot stretch any more, so it's no good not putting a card in the $160 bracket just because a product at $25 more is "better value".
Any way you cut it, I want to know what single card is the best in a certain price bracket. These articles doesn't really do this any more.
Perhaps if the focus of the article was "best value for your money" it would be a different matter - what graphics performance can you get for x amount of money? Yes, then I'd be very interested that a pair of 260GTXs at $360 or 2 4870s at $400 is better value than a single 4870X2.
I'm sure there's room for both here: for each price bracket list best single card and best value option - at the lower price points they'll be one and the same.
it would be good if we saw some reviews of like 2x 150$ cards in xfire/sli vs a 200-300$ card lets actually see something about value for money
and why say get a $520 card when a considerably cheaper card can almost do the same for less.
also surprised you didn't say three 4830's in cf for $285, it would be more powerful than a GTX 285 for less.
What a lot of codswallop "Best for the Price crap" with competition in price variations this is no gauge to suggest that the Card(s) is any good and that it is in fact the best of its class, I’m sure you can do better in varying the Marketing and Sales propaganda and give us some facts and not “Bull Dust”