Low End Video Cards Rant #2

[nicklmg]

Amazon: http://geni.us/1oSK

 

We trashed on low end video cards a few years back and many of you commented on that video saying that we were wrong and stupid. Today we address your points.

 

[Josephdalepi]

nope

low end graphics cards are even more ****

[adams]

Still terrible...

[Nacho Marco Segui]

Wonder what the GT 710's "10x better performance than integrated graphics" was compared to.

To a pentium... It is just pure marketing

[JoshB2084]

*crying in the corner*

     | |

     | |

     \/

[dragoon20005]

HD68xx and HD7850/HD7870 are still worthy used cards which beat the poop out of the GT730 and R7 240

 

now even the iGPU of the Intel beats the shit out of the GT730

 

lmao!

 

 

bottom line is save up for a better card or go used route

[Kirky2k15]

Oooh, I predict a shit storm here...

[AsphyxiateD]

Luke did the great job here explaining price to performance and save more than buy s*** gpu. Well done

[Geralt]

I expect the youtube comments to be full of butthurt again

[LukeTim]

I expect the youtube comments to be full of butthurt again

 

Who the hell gets butthurt over low-end GPUs?

[Geralt]

Who the hell gets butthurt over low-end GPUs?

Look at the comments on the previous video. People were bashing linus all over the place.

[cesrai]

Ehhh... I won both of the cards mentioned ( GT 210 and R7 240 ).

@Slick @nickmlg

How did you benchmark CSGO ?

[Kazetana]

Butthurt comments have already started lol

[PianoPlayer88Key]

Something I've been curious about for a while now, would be ... what would be some examples of single-slot fanless graphics cards that would be appropriate for a lower-end build that doesn't have integrated graphics, and isn't a hardcore gaming rig?  I'm not planning to build one anytime soon (and my parents' PC is likely to have an iGPU when/if they ever replace their almost-8-year-old laptop), I was just wanting to know.

And speaking of which, and considering the trend I think I see toward more power efficiency, less heat output, etc ... will we ever again see a day (like things used to be like 20-30 years ago) when a flagship/enthusiast (Titan-class) graphics card can safely run at stock settings without even a heatsink?

 

Something else I was thinking about, now that I've watched the rest of the video...

 

I've been having some driver issues with my 4790K's iGPU, and last time I tried reinstalling the driver it didn't fix it. (Sometimes the display driver would crash, and I've even had a few blue screens.) So I had been thinking about getting a discrete GPU to get around those issues.  But, right now I can't spend a whole lot, so I was thinking of getting the GT 730 mentioned in the video, or maybe stepping down to the GT 720.  This would be a stop-gap measure, until I could afford a better card - I'm thinking around the $300-330 range or so.  A few months ago I kind-of had my eyes on the GTX 970, but now with the Pascal successor to it coming out in June and supposedly being a significant improvement, I think I'd want to drop the ~$300+ on the GTX 1070 or whatever it's called.

 

But, in the meantime ... there are two options I'm considering.  One is to do things on my laptop that give me graphics problems on my desktop.  The laptop has a Core i3-6100 CPU (yes, an LGA1151) and a GTX 970M GPU.  Another option is to get the Zotac GTX 750 Ti 2GB card (ZT-70605-10M) that's currently going for $105, then replace it when Pascal comes out, or wait for Volta in 2018.  (Okay maybe that's two and a half options.)

 

Which would you LTT forumites recommend?  Is the GTX 750 Ti a bad enough card that Luke chose to not mention it in the video? (Or did I miss it?)  And speaking of used, in your experience, how many generations old would you have to go to get an X80 Ti/X2-class card for the price point of the cards in the video?

[xAdventx]

I loved the original video but this one doesn't have the same feeling and purpose. Should've shown more comparisons that prove dollars/performance isn't there for these gpu's and showed what the sweet spot this actually is. Considering what Luke addressed, this video overall could've been shorter as well because answering comments and specifically calling people out was a bit of a waste. Just integrate all of the complaints that you read into your new video rather than coming off as only being able to address the most popular comments on the video by calling out the people in question that made the comment, especially when Linus freaking already answered one of them.

 

Also, there's a huge issue comparing low end gpu's to a high end cpu's integrated graphics. For real-life scenarios, we're already talking about guys being butthurt about the original rant, and are trying to look for cheap gpu's regardless of how simple it is to understand Linus' "sweet spot" ratio. Comparing Low end graphics to graphics in a high end cpu is straight up completely irrelevant for many viewers. Most viewers talking about "upgrading" their pc's with crappy gpu's will most likely have a crappy cpu. But then again, if they do have a high end cpu then they most certainly dun goofed in making a balanced "gaming" pc in the first place by then trying to find their way to complain about Linus' rant on this types of people that do that.

[Bhav]

I don't understand how there's hundreds of people bashing these videos ... Why would anyone want to waste money on a GT 730 instead of just using the igpu?

[LukeTim]

Which would you LTT forumites recommend?  Is the GTX 750 Ti a bad enough card that Luke chose to not mention it in the video? (Or did I miss it?)  And speaking of used, in your experience, how many generations old would you have to go to get an X80 Ti/X2-class card for the price point of the cards in the video?

 

The 750 Ti is not a low end card. That is why it was not mentioned in the video.

 

Also, with regards to your iGPU issue, get a GeForce 210 like Luke says in the video. It'll do the job for much cheaper.

[TheElt]

I kinda dasagree, there are some cases where going low end is actually worth it, but they're quite rare and you do end up still wasting money

 

I bought a GT630 to go in my Athlon 64 x2 system a few years back, at that point the PSU was too bad to run anything more power hungry, and the CPU was too weak to support anything faster and still bottlenecks the GT630 a lot of the time. Using the onboard GPU wasn't an option because it is abysmal (Slowest basic score on Valley) and I didn't have the money for a new system at the time, so the upgrade served me well for a year and a bit.

 

With modern systems they're pointless, if you need low profile there's 750Ti's that are perfect, if you need display outputs there's the GT210 or bottom end Quadro cards. WIth old systems the CPU could be too weak to make a higher end GPU worth while, you could need low profile but have limits on the power you can draw (Such as SFF Optiplexes and their PCIE power limit of about 35W IIRC), but you need something more powerful than what you have to get you by.

[PianoPlayer88Key]

The 750 Ti is not a low end card. That is why it was not mentioned in the video.

 

Also, with regards to your iGPU issue, get a GeForce 210 like Luke says in the video. It'll do the job for much cheaper.

 

Ahh, okay.  I was thinking it was priced not all that much higher than some cards mentioned in the video, or the previous video.  Looking on pcpartpicker (not logged in, but on the US site), the R7 240 starts at around $74 or so, whereas the 750 Ti I mentioned is $105.  (Maybe that's still a bit much of a leap for some, though.)  As for other options, what do you think of the Radeon HD 5450?  On one benchmark site I use it supposedly is better than the 210, and is somewhat cheaper at $28 starting price.

 

For now, though, I'm thinking of just doing the stuff on my laptop (with its GTX 970M) that my desktop's iGPU balks at.  (It does fine for watching youtube movies and general use, but balks at gaming, like TF2, etc.  I'd be okay with it running low fps or needing to run lower settings/resolution, but when the driver crashes, that's when I have a problem with it.)  Or should I not go that route?  My copy of Windows 10 Pro and a 250GB Crucial M.2 2260 SSD that I'll be putting in the laptop should be arriving today.  But the laptop doesn't have an optical drive, so I'm undecided whether I'll use a tool to put an ISO on a USB thumb drive, or another option I'm maybe considering is opening the laptop up, hooking up the SATA cable from my desktop's optical drive to the laptop's SATA port (if it actually would connect) while powering it off the desktop's Corsair AX760 and doing it that way.

 

Also, speaking of older systems, what if, like a recent poster said, someone had a not-so-great PSU?  Although when I was thinking of the question a few minutes ago I was just thinking about PSUs that didn't have PCI Express power connectors.  Or, if, heaven forbid, someone's computer is old enough to not even HAVE any PCI Express slots, and they don't want to upgrade?  Or....does anyone remember ISA slots in AT-based mobo's+cases?  (I'm sure you wouldn't be playing Witcher/Crysis 3 on that of course!)

 

I think I remember, too, how Crysis used to be considered a game that would really tax even the highest-end GPUs, and I've heard similar things about Witcher 3.  Is it ever possible we'd see a game that is so demanding that even with all settings cranked down so that it looked like the old DOS game 3-Demon, running at like 320x240 resolution, etc, and running with four newest-architecture Titan-class GPUs in SLI and an i7-X CPU, you'd still only get the equivalent FPS to what FireStrike Ultra would be on a Pentium II with a graphics card from that era that was ~$20 new?

[LukeTim]

Ahh, okay.  I was thinking it was priced not all that much higher than some cards mentioned in the video, or the previous video.  Looking on pcpartpicker (not logged in, but on the US site), the R7 240 starts at around $74 or so, whereas the 750 Ti I mentioned is $105.  (Maybe that's still a bit much of a leap for some, though.)  As for other options, what do you think of the Radeon HD 5450?  On one benchmark site I use it supposedly is better than the 210, and is somewhat cheaper at $28 starting price.

 

For now, though, I'm thinking of just doing the stuff on my laptop (with its GTX 970M) that my desktop's iGPU balks at.  (It does fine for watching youtube movies and general use, but balks at gaming, like TF2, etc.  I'd be okay with it running low fps or needing to run lower settings/resolution, but when the driver crashes, that's when I have a problem with it.)  Or should I not go that route?  My copy of Windows 10 Pro and a 250GB Crucial M.2 2260 SSD that I'll be putting in the laptop should be arriving today.  But the laptop doesn't have an optical drive, so I'm undecided whether I'll use a tool to put an ISO on a USB thumb drive, or another option I'm maybe considering is opening the laptop up, hooking up the SATA cable from my desktop's optical drive to the laptop's SATA port (if it actually would connect) while powering it off the desktop's Corsair AX760 and doing it that way.

 

Also, speaking of older systems, what if, like a recent poster said, someone had a not-so-great PSU?  Although when I was thinking of the question a few minutes ago I was just thinking about PSUs that didn't have PCI Express power connectors.  Or, if, heaven forbid, someone's computer is old enough to not even HAVE any PCI Express slots, and they don't want to upgrade?  Or....does anyone remember ISA slots in AT-based mobo's+cases?  (I'm sure you wouldn't be playing Witcher/Crysis 3 on that of course!)

 

I think I remember, too, how Crysis used to be considered a game that would really tax even the highest-end GPUs, and I've heard similar things about Witcher 3.  Is it ever possible we'd see a game that is so demanding that even with all settings cranked down so that it looked like the old DOS game 3-Demon, running at like 320x240 resolution, etc, and running with four newest-architecture Titan-class GPUs in SLI and an i7-X CPU, you'd still only get the equivalent FPS to what FireStrike Ultra would be on a Pentium II with a graphics card from that era that was ~$20 new?

 

So your iGPU works, just not for gaming? I thought you meant it didn't work at all. Forget the stop gap then. A low end video card is a waste of money. If you bought, say, an R7 240 as a stop gap and then a 750 Ti later you'd have spent a total of about $170. You might as well save up and buy a better card straight away.

Play games on your 970M, then once you've saved enough get a 750 Ti or a 950 or something.

[BuckGup]

I am sitting here with my GTX980ti looking down upon all the butthurt people with the GT710 defending it after spending $50-$80 on it

[ShaunC]

I think just waiting for a good deal to come up is worth it.  I purchased a gtx 750 1gb (not Ti) for my brother as a present for $50 about 6 months ago.  He's able to play all the newer games and on reasonable settings.  We should make up a way to put value to gaming experience rubric.  Like on average every $100 you spend on a card expect a 5/10 gaming experience or something odd to that effect lol

[elkenrod]

As someone who has purchased low-end GPUs in the past, I will be the first to say that it's not worth it.

 

The harder people try to justify such a purchase, the more perspective they lose.  There's a ton of confirmation bias

present in the video responses  Luke doesn't really need to go into the price to performance conversation a second time because I

think the original video covers it more than adequately.

 

If your CPU doesn't have integrated graphics, and you are thinking about purchasing a $60 graphic card, it's time to put serious thought into

investing that $60 into a new CPU/Motherboard.

[dom1310df]

I still disagree. I'm not going to spend £100+ for a graphics card that only goes into a headless server at most once a year, I'll just spend £20. I don't have £80+ to leave gathering dust on a shelf.

[PianoPlayer88Key]

So your iGPU works, just not for gaming? I thought you meant it didn't work at all. Forget the stop gap then. A low end video card is a waste of money. If you bought, say, an R7 240 as a stop gap and then a 750 Ti later you'd have spent a total of about $170. You might as well save up and buy a better card straight away.

Play games on your 970M, then once you've saved enough get a 750 Ti or a 950 or something.

Ahh, well I was thinking of the 750 Ti as a stop gap, then the 1070 later in the year. But maybe I should just use the 970M as the stop gap. And besides, if I went the 750 Ti -> 1070 route, it wouldn't have been all that much more $ to just get a 1080 probably.

Then, with the 1070 or 1080 for example, how long should it last, based on past trends, until integrated graphics or low-end cards passes it up in performance & efficiency?

Now, in the laptop, the iGPU doesn't work at all, by design, so I had to go for the 970M. I wanted to save $340 by removing the discrete GPU, then upgrade later. But in researching the laptop before I bought it and asking questions on a notebook forum, I learned that with the nVidia G-Sync, the laptop was wired in a way that didn't support the iGPU. And, besides that, to get a 970M later would have been almost $500 or so. Getting a 980M after the fact would have been near $800, or upgrading to the 980M from the 970M at time of laptop purchase would be $250. Another option would have been to go with a different vendor and gotten the 965M, but they wouldn't configure with anything less than the i5-6600K, and the i7-6700 (non-K) was the same price there. (Everywhere else the 6700 was about $100 more than the 6600K.) With RJTech I was able to get the barebones laptop without the CPU (but with the 970M included), then get the i3-6100 from Newegg.