NVIDIA. GeForce 8200 VS ATI Radeon HD2100

[fire!!]

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

[Jeddy]

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?

[fire!!]

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?

[stevej696]

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...15&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

[fire!!]

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.

[Jeddy]

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.

[stevej696]

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

[fire!!]

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=@@@@1420570535.124998749 0@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccgeadehmgjdgekcflgceggdhhmdgmh. 0&category_oid=-28485&sku=873905&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=n ull#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

[fire!!]

Originally Posted by name='stevej696'

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

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.

[stevej696]

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.