Which is a better rig please?

yep the 5 series cards unless you are going high end (even then the 4870x2 and 285 still hold there own) are just hype, unless the power consumption/heat is a consideration.

Saying that my 5850 cost me £200 and wheni bought my first 4890 it cost the same...the 5850 is a better card.

Im currenty looking for a 4850 for a rig im building at the moment.
 
Mr Krugga said:
Can you say new graphics cards were overhyped then? I could easily agree with that :p

Nowadays, people are recommending 5770s all around - although their real-world performance is still around 4870s, I'd say they both perform similarly when overclocked. Lower power consumption doesn't justify the upgrade, we can clearly see from new GeForce series.

/EOT
Click to expand...

I think the 5770 is still a great choice, considering everybody's overestimating what you need to make a game run well. Most modern games are fine with a 4670, i've got by with an 8400GS for something like two years now.

So if performance isn't an issue for most people what else is there? Power consumption? The 5770 is great here, being based on 40nm. Features? DX11, OpenGL 4.0 and several other things above the 4870. Thing is, most people don't care about fps as long as it runs 'smoothly', which to them is usually around 30fps, probably a bit lower considering television is 24fps. It's pointless recommending a more power hungry card for a tiny bit more performance when something like the 5770 will last for years.
 
i had no problems when i was using my 5750 for a bit, its all up to the person really...some people seem to feel the need that a game isn't worth playing unless you have max settings and are running at 100fps.
Personally as long as game doesn't have min FPS of under 30FPS i consider it playable and i raise the eye candy until it reaches that mark and play away.
 
Camoe said:
Just building a new rig for a freind and wondered which will be faster and in anyway he can sacrifice something for a better GFX card?

But he's really on a budget to £400 will be justified?
Click to expand...

Would it be possible if you could tell us a little more what the PC would be used for? I think in general if your friend could up his budget another £100, it would ensure an all rounded PC capable of most games.

 
^
I wouldn't ever spend £493 on that, my spec for £460 destroys it, the only thing to add to mine is a optical drive of choice, either DVD or Blueray. and why the slow hardrive?
 
In what way stulid? The difference between a 5750 and a 5770 isn't that great, both would be fine for most people's gaming uses. Change the PSU and HDD and it's probably a better choice, considering the motherboard is far better.
 
Superewza said:
In what way stulid? The difference between a 5750 and a 5770 isn't that great, both would be fine for most people's gaming uses. Change the PSU and HDD and it's probably a better choice, considering the motherboard is far better.
Click to expand...

same chipset motherboard! so its not "better", a 5770 is worth the extra every single day.

what I specced is cheaper, a DVD burner only adds £14.99

The C45 motherboard is rather good it seems

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/motherboards/2009/09/17/msi-770-c45-motherboard-review/1
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't use it in anything but a seriously budget PC, cheap PCB and liquid caps, not to mention the small heatsinks. For like £5 more the G45 is a better choice but Gigabyte are pretty much the cream of the crop when it comes to motherboards.

There's an Asus M4A77 board for £55 that would also be a better choice.
 
Superewza said:
I wouldn't use it in anything but a seriously budget PC, cheap PCB and liquid caps, not to mention the small heatsinks. For like £5 more the G45 is a better choice but Gigabyte are pretty much the cream of the crop when it comes to motherboards.

There's an Asus M4A77 board for £55 that would also be a better choice.
Click to expand...

liquid caps? can you read?

quote from the first page of that review.

"Without compromising on quality in the low end, MSI has decked the whole thing in long life Nippon Chemicon solid aluminium capacitors and environmentally sealed ferrite chokes, "
 
I could have specced in a vapor-x and dropped the cpu a little, but this is slighty over 500 then. but I dont see the need too. I put in the wrong HDD also, I meant to put in the F3 500GB.
 
stulid said:
liquid caps? can you read?

quote from the first page of that review.

"Without compromising on quality in the low end, MSI has decked the whole thing in long life Nippon Chemicon solid aluminium capacitors and environmentally sealed ferrite chokes, "
Click to expand...

I swear they used to have liquid caps... or solid caps for the power circuit.

That might have been an AsRock 770 board though, my bad. Other points still stand however.
 
none of your points hold any merit.

one cheap board is just as feature barren as the other, especially considering the same 770 chipset.

and the 5770 is much better choice for games than a 5750, with its extra ram, extra stream processors.

Review of the corsair psu,

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Corsair-CX400W-Power-Supply-Review/750/1

it can even output 450W,

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Corsair-CX400W-Power-Supply-Review/750/8

but wont have to as a 5770 doesnt draw that much power, and you wont use crossfire with these cheaper motherboards anyway,

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/10/13/amd-ati-radeon-hd-5770-review/10
 
Last edited:
Well, I agree with stulid that the 5750 512MB is overpriced at £105, as with £20 extra you can get a 5770 1GB.

Gary's build is indeed a lesser performer, as well as costing more than stulid's build.
 
Gary* said:
My 5750 is weaksauce? I beg to differ, playing on 1920x1080 with medium settings and getting very high framerates I fail to see how people don't even give this card a chance. Sure for an extra £30 you could get the 5770, but in my personal opinion, I really don't think the 5750 is a bad card at all.
Click to expand...

Hush Mr Weaksauce!
 
Mr Krugga said:
Overclock Phenom II and it still does. Although the extra two cores are never guaranteed, there's still a chance you win them :p

Athlon II X4 performs well in other tasks but gaming.
Click to expand...


yes because a PII is faster clock for clock than a PII-based athlon. thats hardly suprising. you said an athlon 2 quad at 2.6 ghz is going to be slower than a pII x2 at 3.2hgz...no kidding. However at the same clock speed there wont be much in it, except the athlon II x4 will have 4 garanteed cores. again, as i said. unless you werent referring to the post directly above yours, but then maybe you needed to be a little clearer?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom