This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why you don't buy low-end GPU's

#41ThePCElitist(Topic Creator)Posted 11/18/2013 3:24:09 PM(edited)
JKatarn posted...
Of course the performance at high/ultra is going to be poor....generally you know what you're getting into when you're buying a low-end card, and they're usually purchased by HTPC people or casual/midcore gamers that just want to play games, and aren't necessarily concerned with having the highest quality image.


No PC gamer with standards will play a game in 2013 at sub 720p resolutions and get 20-40 fps on low settings. If you literally spend $20-$40 more you get double the performance.

If you justify such a terrible gpu then you just like wasting money. There's no possible way to justify the price vs performance of something like a GT 640 or the r7 shown in this video.
---
I hate windows 8!
#42JKatarnPosted 11/18/2013 6:42:17 PM
zxelman posted...
jZangetsu21 posted...
This is what annoys me about PC elitists.

You claim to be the best and always crap down on console players but then you also crap down on other PC users who don't have top of the line hardware.

No wonder I hardly use my PC for gaming anymore. The thought of hanging with people like this....no thanks.


Most elitists are found in forums like here. Playing games with other PC users doesn't consist of a bunch of people going "OH MAN DAT RESOLUTION", when most of the time it's lag they're spamming chat with. Heck, you get people proclaiming lag when it's client-sided, aka terrible specs.

Could just find a social group to hang with as well that won't do this. Console fanboys are just as bad if not usually worse, speaking from personal experience.


The key is to not hang around elitists/fanboys....thankfully they represent an infinitesimally small portion of their respective gaming platforms....unfortunately they are also usually louder and or more obnoxious than the general group, so that tends to lead to people thinking they represent the opinions of the larger whole....they most certainly do not.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#43JKatarnPosted 11/18/2013 6:45:11 PM
ThePCElitist posted...
JKatarn posted...
Of course the performance at high/ultra is going to be poor....generally you know what you're getting into when you're buying a low-end card, and they're usually purchased by HTPC people or casual/midcore gamers that just want to play games, and aren't necessarily concerned with having the highest quality image.


No PC gamer with standards will play a game in 2013 at sub 720p resolutions and get 20-40 fps on low settings. If you literally spend $20-$40 more you get double the performance.

If you justify such a terrible gpu then you just like wasting money. There's no possible way to justify the price vs performance of something like a GT 640 or the r7 shown in this video.


Or they use a HTPC and would like more performance than the integrated video affords, but don't want a larger/hotter card. There are a few use cases. I agree with you on the price/performance argument, but I think there is some market, or they wouldn't bother making the low-end cards.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#44_GRIM_FANDANGO_Posted 11/19/2013 2:26:12 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#45_GRIM_FANDANGO_Posted 11/19/2013 3:50:55 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#46ThePonyColliePosted 11/19/2013 5:23:27 AM
i have a gtx670m and it's more than enough for me. what's the point with all these high end gpus when most games will be more optimized for consoles?
#47TropicMoon10Posted 11/19/2013 5:45:00 AM
JKatarn posted...
Or they use a HTPC and would like more performance than the integrated video affords, but don't want a larger/hotter card. There are a few use cases. I agree with you on the price/performance argument, but I think there is some market, or they wouldn't bother making the low-end cards.


As far as I know, the Radeon 7750 is the strongest low-profile GPU available right now. It costs like $90 and destroys the R7 240 in performance. It's legitimately a solid gaming card if you're fine with sub 1080p resolutions and high graphics instead of ultra. Modern games still run beautifully.

I'm not sure who this card is marketed towards. But I honestly see no point in having it over integrated graphics unless your motherboard came without HDMI and you REALLY needed it.
---
-TropicMoon - as humid as a summer's day on triton
http://i.imgur.com/N9lTE.jpg
#48DarkZV2BetaPosted 11/19/2013 9:13:51 AM
JKatarn posted...
ThePCElitist posted...
JKatarn posted...
Of course the performance at high/ultra is going to be poor....generally you know what you're getting into when you're buying a low-end card, and they're usually purchased by HTPC people or casual/midcore gamers that just want to play games, and aren't necessarily concerned with having the highest quality image.


No PC gamer with standards will play a game in 2013 at sub 720p resolutions and get 20-40 fps on low settings. If you literally spend $20-$40 more you get double the performance.

If you justify such a terrible gpu then you just like wasting money. There's no possible way to justify the price vs performance of something like a GT 640 or the r7 shown in this video.


Or they use a HTPC and would like more performance than the integrated video affords, but don't want a larger/hotter card. There are a few use cases. I agree with you on the price/performance argument, but I think there is some market, or they wouldn't bother making the low-end cards.


In those cases, low-end cards on clearance are a much better value. $10 extra display-outs and a bit of gaming capacity for your old Core 2 setup is not a bad deal. $80 for the same thing, but with slightly better gaming capacity is not.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#49Flaktrooper123Posted 11/19/2013 9:32:38 AM
Come to think of it, why they still manufacture these despite it is rather stupid. However, when I look around,I think the reason is rather obvious. They still sell well. Unlike many of you guys who live in developed countries, many gamers in my country are teenagers. So they can only afford so much, and at the same time, they won't be purchasing 'heavy' games like Battlefield 3. They mostly play dota or those free to play games. Stupid or not depends though. If you already running i5 and the like, it is very stupid because even the intel HD graphics offer better experience. Also another factor is unawareness, they just have no idea how much another $20 or equivalent can buy them.
#50EStar999Posted 11/19/2013 10:34:38 AM
TropicMoon10 posted...
JKatarn posted...
Or they use a HTPC and would like more performance than the integrated video affords, but don't want a larger/hotter card. There are a few use cases. I agree with you on the price/performance argument, but I think there is some market, or they wouldn't bother making the low-end cards.


As far as I know, the Radeon 7750 is the strongest low-profile GPU available right now. It costs like $90 and destroys the R7 240 in performance. It's legitimately a solid gaming card if you're fine with sub 1080p resolutions and high graphics instead of ultra. Modern games still run beautifully.

I'm not sure who this card is marketed towards. But I honestly see no point in having it over integrated graphics unless your motherboard came without HDMI and you REALLY needed it.


The Radeon HD 7750 was NOT designed for gaming. The Radeon HD 7850 costs $20 more than the 7750 and performs much better.