Video Cards, Radeon HD 7850?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Crushed
  • 8 comments
  • 826 views
C

Crushed

Messages
970
United States
NC
Messages
ItsMeReally
No AMD graphics cards are fine. It's just that the current bulldozer(AM3+ socket) processors from AMD are not worth it for gaming when you can get much better performance from an Intel build.
 
Oh I am getting an Intel CPU but would you say this is a good graphics card? Or at least in terms of what else I can get for that price?
 
It's a good card. As for the OC edition, you could try it yourself since it's only a mild overclock. The cooling seems to be the same on both cards.
 
Just get the non-overclock version. You will save money which can go to a really good cpu cooler.
 
It's only 10 dollars more anyway but I will just get the non-overclocked version. So I assume it can run Battlefield 3 and other games very smoothly. But do you guys think this card will still be able to run games smoothly in another 2 or 3 years when the games become more advanced?

Oh and from what I've heard, I am probably going to buy an ASUS one.
 
Last edited:
Crushed
It's only 10 dollars more anyway but I will just get the non-overclocked version. So I assume it can run Battlefield 3 and other games very smoothly. But do you guys think this card will still be able to run games smoothly in another 2 or 3 years when the games become more advanced?

Oh and from what I've heard, I am probably going to buy an ASUS one.
Click to expand...

Well we never know, but most probably it will run most game very well and will struggle on a few game.

My card now is 2-3 year old and I have no problem with most game, however for some game I just can't run them the way I would like to play them.
 
RX-7_FD3S
Well we never know, but most probably it will run most game very well and will struggle on a few game.

My card now is 2-3 year old and I have no problem with most game, however for some game I just can't run them the way I would like to play them.
Click to expand...

Yeah. So instead of very high graphics you mean you have to run them in medium to high graphics. It's normal since computers get 1.5 times faster every 1.5-2 years. That's called Moore's Law. This law was made back in 1965 and it still applies to this date. Of course there is a possibility of this law slowing down since the processors are getting so small. You can read more about Moore's Law here.
 
Personally, I feel Nvidia has slightly better drivers than AMD. (Feel free to contest this as drivers are always a case of hit and miss.) Buying GPUs can be tricky thanks to individual manufacturers too.

It depends a bit on your resolution. I think any midrange card of today should be well suited to good quality gaming at 1920x1080 in the years to come. (I ignore all the super high resolution/4K hoopla.)

Vram plays a factor as well. For example, my 3 year old 260 GTX core 216 would stutter with most high res packs at Full-HD as it only has 896 MB Vram. Fine tune it with optimised packs and it can still be silky smooth. For comfy Full-HD gaming with high res packs I would recommend at least 1.5 GB Vram. (I monitor resources with GPU-Z.)

Of course, the game and CPU used will dictate other factors. Almost all current games take advantage of 4 cores so it should be a minimum for future-proofing.

Some like Crysis 1 love super fast clock speeds over core count, others like Max Payne 3 are as happy with a (relatively slow 2.66 GHz) 1st gen i7-920 as a current gen i7-3770k.

Strategy games like Civ V can love hexacores too.

Some like Skyrim and GTA 4 prefer 4 cores and fast speeds. (Especially the latter.)

Not all games take advantage of HT as well so i5s are solid choices on a tighter budget.

Long story short, way too many factors play a part. Check out review sites like Guru3D, MaximumPC and tomshardware.

(Wonders if Intel hexacores will ever reach the mainstream socket, also waiting for Nvidia's 660 ti.)
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back