My brother's looking at getting a new Core 2 Quad desktop for HD video and a little bit of gaming.

My dad thinks ATI is the only way to go. I've been an nVidia fan for a while. I think a GeForce 9800 GTX or GTX+ would suit his needs, but I also recognize that the Radeon 4850 will too at the same price point. So is there any pressing reason to get one over the other?

Assume Vista Home Premium x64 for the OS.

5/8/2009 11:50:17 AM

nvidia:ati::intel:amd.

5/8/2009 11:52:04 AM

agreed

Nvidia all the way

5/8/2009 11:53:02 AM

So

nVidia 3
ATI 1

5/8/2009 11:56:30 AM

I still think the best bang for your buck right now is the ATI radeon 4870

i've got two (theyre so cheap)...but I'll buy either nvidia or ati depending on whats out there when i build.

5/8/2009 11:59:31 AM

i agree that ATI's are generally more cost effective

but when it comes down to performance, Nvidia is the better choice IMO

5/8/2009 12:03:48 PM

By a little bit of gaming I'm talking stuff likeSpore, not Crysis. The 4870 is total overkill. I'm not going to recommend he spend twice as much on a graphics card for no foreseeable benefit to him.

80% of the gaming he does is on his xBox 360, probably 10% Wii, and the other 10% would be a mix of flash games, old DOS games, the SIMS and other non-intensive PC games.

The only reason I'm even suggesting a 4850 or 9800 is for HD video.

5/8/2009 12:08:34 PM

ati crushes nvidia atm

5/8/2009 1:41:30 PM

lol no it doesnt.

5/8/2009 1:45:11 PM

amd will currently net you more FPS per your dollar. But Nvidia holes the proformance crown. If you want your value card, you can get a 4870 for about 120/130 which is about the best bang for the buck in the market.

5/8/2009 2:10:46 PM

actually, i'm pretty sure that comparable ATI and NVIDIA cards are performing almost perfectly against each other...yes, one might have a slight advantage over another, but when you compare the overall scores, they're neck-and-neck

then you compare prices, power consumption, heat generation, etc and ATI is back on top being cheaper, more efficient, and cooler for the same performance

don't even consider a 9800...it's a horrible card compared to the GTS 250 (which performs and costs about the same, but with much better power management, heat generation, and smaller form factor)...but at that performance level, you're better off with a 4850 because of the reasons mentioned above...though, really, the 4870 is the magical "best value" card at the moment...you can pick one up a 1gb card for ~$150 if you watch slickdeals/ben's bargains (the comparable GTS 260 costs ~$180 on sale, IIRC)

[Edited on May 8, 2009 at 2:19 PM. Reason : .]

5/8/2009 2:19:10 PM

Yeah, if I see one for $120 from eVGA or PNY or somebody reputable maybe I'll tell him.

512 MB 4870: $140
896 MB GTS 260: $154

The equal-level cards really all cost about the same. I didn't see a 1GB 4870 for less than $160 though.

[Edited on May 8, 2009 at 2:32 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2009 2:20:39 PM

^ where do you see a 260 for $154? i did, however, find this 896mb GTX 260 OC for $160 AR with free shipping, which is a pretty good price for the overclocked version: http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10010437

this 1gb 4870 was just $146 the other day, but i think the rebate is over
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10010240

5/8/2009 2:42:28 PM

MSi and OC'ed
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127430

(haha same card different site)

5/8/2009 3:31:54 PM

oh, dang, yours is $5 cheaper and from newegg (who i'd choose over any other retailer any day)...gg

5/8/2009 3:34:47 PM

i'll see my brother tonight. i'll let him know the options.

5/8/2009 3:46:59 PM