omar_killer wroteIt's a really good card but it's way above my budget,my VGA budget is 250$ max
btw,what is the price of the HD 6850?
as i remember, i saw it for 247$ at pcandparts.com but you should check definitely other shops because manufacturer prices can vary by 50$ sometimes ( maybe you could get the 6850 for 200$ and you can get it at 300$ ) but the chip is the same except for the cooling features and some others too.
great,I will defiantly go and see other shops,I have a feeling that ordering from PCandParts is gonna be complicated (it's my first time),did you try getting something from PCandParts?is it really cheaper?
Ok...that's a mediocre resolution at best...any card will be powerful enough for such a resolution. You want my advice? Future-proof...hey don't get the best card out there, few do, but a good card will make sure that you can enalbe anti-aliasing or ambient occlusion (basically, shadows for miniature objects like grass) which improves graphics quality, or you can play games if you decide to go higher (1600 x 900, 1680 x 1050, 1920 x 1080). It will last you longer if you stay at a lower resolution. Your budget is great, IMO. The sweet spot for performance / price.

EDIT: MegaCool, isn't ATI driver support really improving these last few updates? I mean, ATI update drivers every month maybe once or twice, Nvidia is starting to get kinda lazy. Maybe because Nvidia is stabler, but the issue of drivers is rapidly becoming a moot point. I mean, ATI have got some really awesome performance / price ratios! Fewer and fewer are complaining about performance with ATI, too. Am I correct? I mean, you're the guy with the ATI card :D
I want to get a new full HD screen,it's on the waiting list too,but the budget is my only problem here.
Well I recommend you expand your VGA budget to the max. You don't want to regret your decision later on. A GTX 560Ti outperforms the 6850, but not by much. Don't worry about Nvidia PhysX, with very few games supporting it and open-source physics receiving more support than Nvidia's proprietary solution.
right now at this point,it's 250$ max
but after a month,things might change.
omar_killer wroteI want to get a new full HD screen,it's on the waiting list too,but the budget is my only problem here.
Hey omar, don't get an FULL HD SCREEN because you will regret it once you want to play your games because playing games on 1920x 1200 is one hell of sucker for graphic cards and you won't enjoy the game with its maximum details.. What i advise you is to get a 32" LCD /LED of resolution 1360x 768 i think because it has lower resolution and wider screen and larger plus the prices aren't that different. You can get an LCD Samsung 32" for 380$ as much as i remember and i saw a LED one with this resolution for 540$ and Multimedia megastore near Geant CityMall.
oh really?
and yea,I'am really happy with my monitor (Asus VW192s),it's old but it's very good,google it,
I saw this:LG E2040S Wide 20" LED for 126$ on PC&Parts
godfatherdany: he is going to buy a Radeon HD 6850 or GTX 460 (or GTX 560 at most). The sweet spot is 1920 x 1080. I have such a monitor, and I have no problems with GTX 260. It's a matter of preference, however. If Omar is willing to select medium-high details later on (2-3 years??) with a full HD screen, then he should get one. If he wants the absolute best graphics, I suggest he upgrade more frequently (I don't do that). What I mean is, the monitor is the only part in the PC you spend the most time looking at, a higher resolution is where the PC shines. If he wants 720p, he should get a console. We're not talking about 2560 x 1600 here.

If his PC will be struggling with games (which I doubt!) later on, then he can select a lower resolution, provided the upscaling is done over the GPU (not within the monitor). MegaCool does that, and he has a 1080p monitor. MegaCool, how is the experience of running 720p over a 1080p monitor? Do you use GPU scaling, or monitor scaling?
yasamoka, actually my 3 year old GPU struggles with current games at 1080p resolutions, but of course, gotta admit, I hooked up my brother's gaming Laptop which has a mid-range 5xxx ATI card to the monitor, and we tried some of the recent games such as Bad Company 2 and Dead Space 2 @1080p, and gotta admit - mind was blown. It looks just too good, especially at decent frame rates. 720p is great for performance, but it looks blurry compared to 1080p visuals, of course, on a 1080p monitor.

Regarding ATI drivers, I haven't bothered updating mine in a while - not sure about the recent updates, but I remember how I struggled in running a lot of applications because of the poor drivers.
yasamoka wrotegodfatherdany: he is going to buy a Radeon HD 6850 or GTX 460 (or GTX 560 at most). The sweet spot is 1920 x 1080. I have such a monitor, and I have no problems with GTX 260. It's a matter of preference, however. If Omar is willing to select medium-high details later on (2-3 years??) with a full HD screen, then he should get one. If he wants the absolute best graphics, I suggest he upgrade more frequently (I don't do that). What I mean is, the monitor is the only part in the PC you spend the most time looking at, a higher resolution is where the PC shines. If he wants 720p, he should get a console. We're not talking about 2560 x 1600 here.

If his PC will be struggling with games (which I doubt!) later on, then he can select a lower resolution, provided the upscaling is done over the GPU (not within the monitor). MegaCool does that, and he has a 1080p monitor. MegaCool, how is the experience of running 720p over a 1080p monitor? Do you use GPU scaling, or monitor scaling?
why not get an lcd TV 32 inch if he has the extra bucks and have much larger resolution ? btw , the coming games are gonna kill the pc like dragon age 2 and stuff like that which should have at least a C2Q so i donno it's his choice .
but at 1920x1200 and 1280x1024 (19 inch standard ) , there are frame rates of difference between 10-15 minimum in games tested on tomshardware.com ! But i don't think omar will keep updating because i think he wants to get one and for all times. It's his choice! Good luck omar!
thx danny,no,I won't be updating my system frequently,if i had more money i think that i will get an hd monitor,720p
MegaCool wrote
thegodfatherdany wrotehi,omar.. I agree with Zeraw about getting a console for games and a PC for everything else . I am too a Pc gamer and want the best to play my games on high settings but to achieve this, you need to pay too much money because every time they release a new game , you will need a better graphic card and a better system and better overall performance from your computer. Your to-be computer is quite good BUT : Inno3D Geforce GT430 2GB DDR3 is not a good card for gaming because it has low CUDA cores and it's performance is very limited and plus, it is used mainly for Blu-ray Movies and photo viewing in addition to video playing and poorly for gaming . Believe me , if you get this PC you are building , you are staying in the same place you are because Ram are identical somehow and graphic card is a bit bit more powerful from than your 9500gt.

I wanted to buy a Geforce these days but then i thought that after one week , it would be old and my budget was about maxim. 200$ ( Nvidia GTX 460 SE ) and that was still not good for these upcoming games.
Just buy a console ( Xbox 360 Pro for 280$) and play your games on HD without having headache from computer games.

If you want help with computers and graphic cards, feel free to message me .
That's a total myth, yes my friend, hardware is always getting updated, just like smartphones these days, but that doesn't mean if there's something new in the market you have to go out and grab it or else your outdated. Totally not! I bought my graphics card 3 years ago for $130 and there's no game I cant play, even the newest titles I can pull decent framerates at 720p resolution.

@Omar
Regarding the PC your building, yes just like thegodfatherdany told you, dont get a gt430, its a low end card. Get yourself a HD 5770 or the HD 5830, and your good to go for at least 3 years if your aiming for medium settings. Good luck!
I am still enjoying my 5 years old 400$ xbox360.
can you honestly say you will stay enjoy the same quality gaming after 5 years on the same hardware on the PC?
on the console you pay for the hardware once every 5+years this is the only difference.
You do not need to pay for every major GFX card, but if you do not upgrade from time to time you fall behind and you need to actually know when you need to upgrade.
ie I bought the x850xt at full price several years ago for 600$.
I did not do any kind of research before getting it and just 3months later it was reduced to 250$.

you have a lot of GFX cards out there, developers support major/latest ones with fallbacks to older ones.
you cannot possibly enjoy 1080p on your graphic card but I am able to enjoy the max of my hardware on the console all the time. This was my point.

if you want to be a PC gamer, it is your choice and taste and I respect it but after many $$$ lost in the PC gaming I switched to console and I couldnt be happier :)
I am still enjoying my 5 years old 400$ xbox360.
Yup, with sub-HD resolutions @30fps with heaps of jaggies and ugly textures.

@ZeRaW I'm a foremost console gamer ever since the NES and SEGA Mega Drive times, but I have to disagree, you're being totally misinformed,again, who says you have to get the most powerful and expensive hardware to keep playing PC games, as I said, my 3 years old $130 card, which is at least twice as powerful as the 360, is still doing great with every single game released so far, (except for Crysis). On PC, you can still benefit from graphics customizations, unlike consoles
you have a lot of GFX cards out there, developers support major/latest ones with fallbacks to older ones.
where did you get that from? developers are still supporting the 10+ years old DX9 API until this day, with the exception of Battlefield 3.

Lets just not hijack this thread, I think Omar will enjoy PC gaming using a 6850, which is a great DX11 card.
even my system can handle gta iv/battle field BC2/COD:black ops (my VGA is point of view 9500Gt)
so IMO is that even this low-end card can handle those games(at a good fps/graphics btw)..then what about those high-end cards...

Edit:I can't imagine myself holding a PS3 or Xbox controller and playing games on it..it's just wrong...now that's my opinion..since everyone have his own opinion.
hey omar, well I read your post and skimmed the rest of what everyone wrote, anyway if you wanna read about pc vs consoles we discussed it before in this thread...

anyway let me help you out, since you want your pc for gaming, you need to focus on what to buy for graphics card and power supply, the rest is not as important as these are...

my rig is:
2.2ghz dual core
3gb ram ddr2
for vga: 1gb gts 250 (nvidia ofcourse)
and for power supply a thermaltake 600w
I can run any game on max settings on a resolution of 1440x900

now youre old pc is pretty good
-CPU:Intel core2duo e4600 2.4Ghz

-VGA:point of view nvidia geforce 9500Gt 512

-RAM:4gig DDR2
and since you have a 9500gt that means youre motherboard can support pci-express cards,
ok how about you just upgrade your old pc?
youre cpu is great for games, youre not gonna notice any difference in gaming, its just that installing games will be faster on a core i5 but trust me its not worth it, and you wont get any +fps in games, me and my friend have tried this on a corei3 vs a dual core and there was no difference in the fps, even if there is there will be only max +5fps.

for you rams, well there good man you dont need ddr3, what you'll notice the difference between a ddr2 and ddr3 is that the loading times are faster on a ddr3, yeah but just 5 seconds faster, again me and my friend have tried this...

trust me man, you dont need to upgrade youre entire case, just buy a new power supply and a vga and you'll be set for another 4 years, and you could possible need a new ups to support youre power supply if the one you have is weak...
and for the vga here is a chart for a bunch of vga's running crysis on dx10 at a massive resolution of 1920x1200 and with 2xAA , suck on that xbox/ps/console users hahaha :






EDIT: if I were you I would buy the nvidia 1 gb gtx 470 its priced $395.00 at pc and parts, ofcourse 395+39.5(for vat) = 434$ and you would still have 216$ for a decent power supply, if you buy this, you will play any game on max resolution/settings for atleast 6 years...

if you want to see more results like the one above go here
thanks Nemesis-301,that's a neat solution.
I will compare upgrading my PC,or buy a new one..and see what's better.
You guys, do you read reviews before posting??
Omar, check this out, it speaks for itself: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1472067

Basically, the guy there uses a HD5870, which you'll come extremely close to if you buy a GTX 460 and overclock it, an HD6850 and overclock it, or a GTX 470 and overclock it (you'll surpass it then).

The i5 CPU he's using is last gen, so the planned i5 2500 CPU is 50% faster (allows for future proofing).
Please take care not only to check the average framerate, but also the minimum framerate and overall smoothness and framerate dips (these are the most important).

Second, the GTX 560Ti is almost identical in performance to the GTX 470, while consuming less power and releasing less heat. It also has further overclocking headroom since it is further down the bin (560 - 570 - 580 compared to 470 - 480). If you have the money to spring for a GTX 470, spring for the GTX 560Ti. Forget about previous gen cards except if you get a good bargain / receive a price offer.

EDIT: When getting a motherboard,there's no choice between DDR2 and DDR3. They aren't electrically compatible. Boards that support DDR2 don't support DDR3, and vice-versa.
@Nemesis a dual core isnt future proof, his CPU is good for 2006 games - a weak cpu will bottleneck a high-end card, many of the current games are core dependent, people stop pulling stuff out of no where. A friend of mine had a core 2 duo with an HD 5770, he used to get 35fps max in Dirt 2, once he upgraded to an i7 @3.2GHz, he achieved a total boost of 20+fps, he even reached 60fps. So stop deceiving the man without backing it up with proofs, here is a comparison link from anandtech, notice almost the double frame rate difference, and that's between the best Core 2 Duo out there (E600) and an i5 2500k - there's almost a whopping 89fps difference in Dragon Age