First lemme say it's been a while. 48 hours work a week plus college = lack of time. Second, I just bought
Nvidia's GeForce GTS 450 from Newegg. Wanted a mid range card since the 9400GT SUCKS and can hardly play games worth anything anymore. Was it a good choice? I thought it was, wanted to play PC games at least mid-high settings, 1280x720+, you know. Also I need to find classic 3D glasses so I can play stuff in in 3D. Is it awesome?
Yes, that's awesome... At least a lot better than your now 9400GT.
If you are content in playing mid-range resolution, like 1280x1024, then it is good. Anything higher, it seems to lose to 5770, probably due to less bandwidth.
otherwise, it is a great midrange card...
I thought you need 2 nvidia cards for 3d gaming, but that could've changed recently. There's the semi-3d (red-cyan glasses) in dolphin though that can work on any gpu
(11-01-2010, 02:28 PM)a mad pigeon Wrote: [ -> ]Wanted a mid range card since the 9400GT SUCKS and can hardly play games worth anything anymore
i know nothing of the new gen of cards but euh...
i have a 8600GTS and that can play recent games just fine
are you saying 8600GTS > 9400GT? :/
(11-02-2010, 03:59 AM)Ocean Wrote: [ -> ]I thought you need 2 nvidia cards for 3d gaming, but that could've changed recently. There's the semi-3d (red-cyan glasses) in dolphin though that can work on any gpu
You have always needed 1 for 3D, it's 2 that's needed for triple-monitor setups. I need to get one.
@zurginator
Well the upper 400 series cards only need 1 card for triple monitor now, just like ati.
Quote:are you saying 8600GTS > 9400GT? :/
Yes but not by much. The 8600GTS is in between the 9400gt and 9500gt in performance, closer to the 9400gt though. A gts 450 trades blows with the gts250/9800GTX/8800GTS (G92).
I personally would have gone with a 5750/5770 instead since they offer better performance per dollar. But a gts 450 will still be miles better than a 9400gt (about 18 times as fast if I'm not mistaken).
(11-02-2010, 03:30 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]@zurginator
Well the upper 400 series cards only need 1 card for triple monitor now, just like ati.
Quote:are you saying 8600GTS > 9400GT? :/
Yes but not by much. The 8600GTS is in between the 9400gt and 9500gt in performance, closer to the 9400gt though. A gts 450 trades blows with the gts250/9800GTX/8800GTS (G92).
I personally would have gone with a 5750/5770 instead since they offer better performance per dollar. But a gts 450 will still be miles better than a 9400gt (about 18 times as fast if I'm not mistaken).
Maybe on paper it is about 16 times more capable, in practice though it is about 8 times.
benchmarks
Still a game that run with 10 fps in the past will now probably run with 80fps for him. Or a 7 fps game will run at 60fps. That's a hell of an upgrade really.
Come on, how can someone not approve of that card, pigeon. Are you serious, you didn't know if it was good or not?
Hahaha, I knew it was good though. I was just asking since some might say I shoulda gotten an ATI instead for the performance/price ration. I have it now and it's sick. Plays everything max settings in 1080 like Bioshock and Source, can play Crysis on high/very high 1920x1080 around 30fps. It murders the 9400GT. Worthy upgrade if you ask me
If your price was 130 bucks , then you did a good thing to buy this piece of crap... I would have waited for 6850 anyways(180 bucks but nothing compare), but nice choise for the price again!