NVIDIA. GeForce 8200 VS ATI Radeon HD2100

fire!!

New member
Hi,

I am looking to buy a new computer and found two at my price range, but i was just wondering about the graphics card.

can you please tell me which graphics card is better when it comes to playing games, it doesn't matter if it doesn't play all the latest games, i just want something that is good enough for some.

The first card is NVIDIA. GeForce 8200 and the second is ATI Radeon HD2100, i would be very greatful if you can tell me which is better for gaming, examples of games that can be played for each of the cards will really help me in my decsion.

Thank you
 
You will barely be able to game on either. You might be able to run older source games, maybe CSS on minimum settings.

If you are looking to game on games released even 5 years ago you are going to struggle with either of those cards.

What is your price range and maybe we can spec you up a system?
 
my price range is £300 but i only need a base unit which is good to use on a daily basis and has a good graphics card.

i found these ones on the pc world website which looked reasonable enough for the price its selling at, i would provide a link but i need to make 15 posts :)

btw which graphics card is better from the two?
 
I agree with jeddy mate, you need a minimum of 256mb graphics for earlier games like san andreas for instance. Also depends on the screen resolution too.

If you want to play games at a budget and fancy getting a third party graphics card then depending on your budget there are some good low price cards that can handle most games at 1280x1024 resolution with medium settings except games like gta4/ crysis etc.

here's some examples http://www.ebuyer.com/search?store=2&cat=215&subcat=2489

edit: just read your last post; check out ebuyer.com they have good bargains with complete systems or if you want build your own, if you get stuck or need help then oc3d is here to help

hope this helps;)

stevej696
 
i disagree with you steve because my current computer is like 7 years old, i have windows xp, 768 ram, ati 9550 graphics with 128 ram and i am able to play san andres easily with no lags at all.

Go to pc world website and look for PACKARD BELL X2326 Refurbished PC Base Unit

put a www at the start of the url

pcworld.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/089905#productInformationSection

i checked out ebuyer and they don't have well branded computers for my price range, they are very good for its value, but the brand it the problem.
 
Well pretty much any graphics card is better.

For £300 you will be running a pretty basic unit but PC world is VERY overpriced.

If you are confident to have a crack at building it yourself then you can save a fair bit of money.

£300 rig:

CPU:http://www.ebuyer.com/product/136551

MOBO: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/161001

GPU: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/155493

RAM: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/116260

HDD: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/124732

Case/PSU: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/135101

Operating System: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/123059

DVD drive: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/170014

That should give you a basic but very acceptable pc for playing older games on and everyday usage.

You will have to build it yourself but that is a great experience and there is limitless help on this forum for you.

This build I have specced up will be able to play older games very easily and newer games on low settings.

The PC you linked from pc world gets spanked hard by the pc I have specced up above.

Brand should not be an issue tbh. Prebuilt pc's from "branded" names are always on a high profit margin.
 
i mentioned 256mb ram or above as depending on the game, level of detail you want and the screen your using, will require different amounts of power gpu wise.

I run a 512mb radeon 3450 at the moment and i can run san andreas at 1366x768 with 3x AA and very high graphic details silky smooth:)

Thats a good system otherwise but i personally like building my own systems:D
 
is my current ati readon 9550 with 128 ram better than those two i have mentioned? i mean steve says that i wont even be able to play san andres on either of them and yet my current pc which is 7 years old can run it easily.

did you check out the base unit on pc world

put a www at the start of the url

pcworld.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/089905#productInformationSection

the second one is

pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1420570535.1249987490@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeadehmgjdgekcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&category_oid=-28485&sku=873905&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null#productInformationSection

i have also never built my own pc so therefore i will not even try it just in case something goes wrong, but thanks for the advice.

what i wanted to know is which graphics card is better from the two, its should be better than the ati readon 9550 i have at the moment. examples og games
 
name='stevej696' said:
i mentioned 256mb ram or above as depending on the game, level of detail you want and the screen your using, will require different amounts of power gpu wise.

I run a 512mb radeon 3450 at the moment and i can run san andreas at 1366x768 with 3x AA and very high graphic details silky smooth:)

Thats a good system otherwise but i personally like building my own systems:D

i can also run san andres at similar resoulution with my current graphics card, but can you tell me what games i would be able to play with the grapichs card i mentioned.

just want to point out my current ati readon 9550 with 128 ram is able to play pro evolution soccer 2009 at 640 X 480 at med quality, this card cant be as good as the once i have mentioned.
 
well personally ive found that the lower end radeons i have used over the times have had more punch than similar priced nvidias but this isnt always the case.

games wise i cant really say as i have only ever had mid/ top range graphics.:rolleyes:
 
name='stevej696' said:
well personally ive found that the lower end radeons i have used over the times have had more punch than similar priced nvidias but this isnt always the case.

games wise i cant really say as i have only ever had mid/ top range graphics.:rolleyes:

so your not sure which graphics card is better from the two? did you check the link?
 
As far as I can tell, the 2100 may be a little higher, but there is not much in it. I seriously advise you to either build it yourself which is surprisingly easy or raise you budget. PC world is very overpriced and unfortunately any prebuilt system will have a significant markup.

For around £330 or so, you could get a pretty nice self built pc. The only issue is, do you have an operating system and a monitor etc, or does that need to be factored in?
 
it is still overpriced even if it is refurbished? i've seen newer versions for around £530 but these are refurbished and less than £300, i would consider it as a bargain to be honest. the only reason why i would not build one is because i am not too confident, i have never done it before.

is there any chance you can tell me what sort of games i can play on either one, examples would be great
 
The problem is that these do not represent value for money. The processor in that is clocked at 2.1GHz, which is ludicrously low, and the motherboard will not allow overclocking.

The only advantage is that it has an OS on it. The sort of games you could play would be five year old at best and probably with minimum graphics. An 8200 is not designed for gaming, it is designed to be an entry level graphics device, fit maybe to run aero, but little more.

The whole computer will be very budget, will be difficult to upgrade and is slow even by laptop standards.
 
What could it be used for then?

can you recommed any other base units for a range of £300 from pcworld or any other branches? i am only looking for something that will run games, not saying that it has to be the latest but something decent, and also something that is reasonable for everyday things such as wacthing films, videos, that is why i thought that one of the computers would be decent for my needs.
 
Sorry to sh*t on your parade but for £300 with OS you will struggle to build a PC to play games at any kind performance.

If you up your budget to around £450 and build yourself you can overclock and get a VERY respectable PC.

There is all the hope that you need on this forum :D
 
recommedations on base units would be nice to think about pls send me a link to see.

would you recommed this

pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0756456718.1250005282@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeadehmgjdgekcflgceggdhhmdgmh.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=334745&category_oid=-28485#productInformationSection

as you can see the graphics card works gta at low resolutions, but it still works

youtube.com/watch?v=OLstWOzIHeg
 
I take it you are not willing to build your own computer? As for games "prebuilt" units will often have to be quite expensive models to get a graphics card option.

If you build the pc yourself (which is a great experience) then you get the pc that you want, with no unnesscesary components etc.

If you are not willing to build then perhaps look at prebuilt systems from www.scan.co.uk or similar.
 
Agreed, the £300 machine from pc world will be acceptable for playing dvds, basic web browsing and emailing and word processing, but not anything requiring graphical prowess.

If you could stretch the budget to £450, you could go for a very nice system, with vista home premium, a decent cpu cooler, a 2.5ghz pentium dual core, overclockable to 3.6, a 4670 on a p43 board which would handle most games fine and be quite nippy enough.

Building yourself will mean you get the pc you want, is a nice experience and will not take long. Where are you based?

The pc world unit you just highlighted is a slightly better option, but will still come with intel cooling, so no overclocking, a poor graphics chip and only 2gb of ram. In addition the board only has two pci slots, which means it is very budget and the psu will in all probability not be able to support a better GPU.
 
not really looking to build one as i am not confident, scared something may go wrong and cant fix it and anit got the time. but thanks for the link i will take a look.

i really do not want to exceed £300 but may be interested in putting an extra £20, send me a link to something that may handle something like Bioshock, btw wouldn't either of the cards handle games at low settings like Bioshock?

btw if you looked at the base unit itself, it doesn't mention full amount of details concerning the parts it has installed, i.e sound cards etc, will it be in there, i tried emilng pc world and they have not given me a reply for three days now.

based in london
 
Back
Top