recommend me a GFX card
 

I've just upgraded my CPU from a core 2 duo to a Quad Q9650 3gig (oc to 3.6)

Currently i have a radeon ati 4870 512mb.

I think that the bottle neck is now my gfx card as i get quite poor performance in il2 cod especially at lower altitude.

Can anyone recomend me a good upgrade? I am looking to spend no more then £150.


Thanks in advance.

Im an nvidia man myself, but if were you Id look real close at the Radeon HD 6950 2 GB

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ce,3042-4.html

If you have no preference over Ati or Nvidia

At around the same price is the 560ti 2gb

A little over your budget though :(

http://www.google.co.uk/products/cat...ed=0CGkQ8wIwBg

You wont be disappointed with a GTX 570.

This is what I have ordered (only it is factory OC) and will arrive early next week. Can't wait to see what it offers in the form of CLoD graphics with setting on high :grin:.

Although a bit over your intended price range, at $350 Canadian it is supposed to pack some serious punch in performance for the price.

Whiskey

Quite right, but these are around £250 in the UK, or at least that's what I paid for an EVGA HD 'superclocked'.

To be honest, I'm not sure anything cheaper would 'float your boat', as far as Cliffs is concerned, but I'll second Alpha's recommendation. I've really gone off AMD/ATI recently.

I have a Gigabyte GTX 560 Ti OC 1024MB and it's doing fine with med/high settings. Price was about 180 EUR.

Three of us "Pigs" are using factory OC'd 570s. It's a great card.

GTX560ti 2Gb (notice the "ti")
GTX570 2,5Gb

These are the two NVIDIA cards to have for the time being (sorry, I am not an ATI guy so not experience there).

Do not go for less than 2Gb VRAM.

The game plays nicely with these cards after the latest patch.

Probably the GTX560ti 2Gb is the one that fits the budget.

~S~

2GB memory is useless on a GTX 560. Put that extra money into a better card or a couple bottles of rum.

Silky smooth with a 1.5 gb GTX 580 here, but it may be outside your budget range.

I personally have a GTX 460 which will play the game around 25-35 FPS (I don't know the exact but that's my estimation) on all Medium Settings, a couple on High, and nothing turned off. It only lags if there is a big fireball nearby or the wind dust effect behind you as well as the crashes in water from External view. It runs much smoother at something lower than my native resolution: 1920 by 1200. Hope this helps and sorry for the wall of text.

Get either a Nvidia 560ti or a Ati 6950 . Both are about the same speed wise , COD doesnt use either to their full potential do go with whatever's the best price for you.

The 560it seems to be improved by a new version: http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-p...-ti/13805.html

Toms Hardware (referenced earlier) is a good site. Here's the October GPU hierarchy listing
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ce,3042-7.html

I'm running the EVGA GTX570 suprclocked with 1.28Gb memory (nearly a year old now). It runs well at High settings, 40-60fps (I turn Grass off) but the more memory you can afford on the GPU the better.

I was looking at the new 6xxx ATI series back then but I went in favour of Nvidia as I've been with them for some years and never a problem. I believe there are some issues with the ATIs (SLi??) but others can tell you what or you can search the forums.

interesting: bought my graphic card I'd say two years ago and it is still in the top 5 in tomshardware ranking ... do we reach a point where there will be no or only minor performance increase due to being close to what is possible with today's technology?

I think "today's technology" is probably the point.

I've no doubt that one day people will be running 160,000 x 100,000 resolution at 100fps giving almost Mk1 eyeball imagery. In fact "new technology" may not even use the concept of 'resolution'. Who'd have believed in the 1980s when Bill Gates came up with DOS that we'd end up where we are now.

From the same GFX card comparison link

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ce,3042-7.html

"You can use this hierarchy to compare the pricing between two cards, to see which one is a better deal,
and also to determine if an upgrade is worthwhile.
I don’t recommend upgrading your graphics card unless the replacement card is at least three tiers higher.
Otherwise, the upgrade is somewhat parallel and you may not notice a worthwhile difference in performance."

The technology does reach a point but manufacturers still need to keep selling, so GFX cards are always being made to make sales,
the point is for the consumer the above statements 3 tier recommendation, but there's always people with money to burn so new
CPU GPU Ram Mobo every year is normal for them.
I use a 3 year cycle of replacement/upgrade then after 4-5 years a complete new high end system.




.

The only point I would make is if, for example, you are considering a GTX570 be aware that they come with more memory now than my 1.28Gb. My card hits 1.2Gb usage in CoD and would probably use more if I had it. I think more memory is worth the stretch.

Thanks for all the help guys. I've upped my budget a bit (will be eating baked beans and pasta for the rest of the month) and have gone for Sapphire Radeon HD 6950 2GB GDDR5. Hopefully it will run COD at fairly high settings with a good FPS

Great choice...the only reason i went with the 6950 is because it has 2GB and i was reading on the internet that alot of games go over 1GB VRAM usage and the 570 with 2GB was much too expensive (compared to the 1.2GB 570). In that price range nothing compares to the 6950, its a great card.

Expect max setting @ 1920x1080 but withh no aa, trees low, building low for competitive play. Who needs trees or aa anyways...turn them off in all games, thats what i do. ATI cards are kinda slow with AA in some games currently.

I use an GTX570HD 2.5GB and cliffs of dover with maxed graphics uses 2.2GB vram on 1920x1080... battlefield 3 uses 1.6GB... so there's games that use that much