Thinking about getting HD Raedon 7770 : thoughts?

[d4u7211]

Kk peeps

Need your input. I'm thinking about getting an HD Raedon 7770 card since I wanna buy something for my 20th coming up. The price ranges from $100 to $130 USD, and so far the main difference is like 30 MHz or GB of RAM.

I like ASUS and GIGABYTE mfcs for this card, but do you guys have any other input? Like, perhaps a better card model for around this price?

Current specs:
-AMD FX 8120 (contrary to flak it runs much more smoothly than some i7 processors I've used, ages especially well)
-8GB RAM
-ASUS M5A97 (i believe has 2 pcie 2.0 x16s)
-HD Raedon 6450 (625 MHz 1 GB pcie 2.0 x16)

[SethColeman]

I ain't the guy to ask for specs, but this is just some basic advice. If this item is truly the only thing you see viable, just go for it, but keep your eye out for something else, even if it isn't a computer related item. If your current set-up isn't bad, maybe you could keep what you got and buy some weed or something? Idk, just keep your eye out. And happy 20th.

[Fission]

^^^ dumb post

650 ti is a better choice imo because nvidia drivers are more universally supported, it's not that much more expensive, and has better synthetic benchmarks (for what they are worth) than the 7770

[trumaestro]

I would wait until AMD's new GPUs hit the market. The older stuff usually goes down in price and you might be able to get a 7850 for that price.

Asus and Gigabyte are good brands, so is Sapphire.

[ReikonKeiri]

i guess i shouldnt ignore this thread since that happens to be the graphics card im running right now lol. It's fantastic. Haven't run into problems with any games so far. My 2c

[Fission]

Originally Posted by trumaestro

I would wait until AMD's new GPUs hit the market.

and then you end up waiting until the new ones after that hit the market

and then you end up waiting until the new ones after that hit the market

and then you end up waiting until the new ones after that hit the market

i'm pretty sure he was just looking for a video card around that price range, not just the 7770. if you think like this, you are going to be waiting forever.

[ReikonKeiri]

i never got the idea of buying a graphics card for $500 that will last 10 years instead of a graphics card for $100 that will last 5 l0l

[d4u7211]

Thanks for the input. The GTX 650 ti looks pretty nice, actually, and I'd be willing to go as high as $130 (after rebates) which brings up a bit of a problem.

I'm losing some performance if I stick with the 7770 but I can grab another GB of memory on the card and save $15. With the 650 I can only get $130 price after rebates and it will only be a 1 GB card - but it also has better reviews.

I also found a card with a $30 rebate which brings me to $125 for the 7850, but it's by MSI which I don't trust that much.

also sucks that the cards are all PCIe 3.0 and I don't think there are any am3+ socket PCIe 3.0 capable boards.

I'll probably end up sticking with either the GTX 650 Ti or the 7770 (leaning towards the latter since I'm also shelling out for a monitor too) unless you guys think that the 7850 is a good choice : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127663

[PriestREA]

In my experiences with AMD, they are nothing but a sub-par company releasing sub-par products as an ill geared attempt to "compete" with nVidia and Intel. Granted, their high end GPU's have started to put up some amazing numbers, but their mid-range and low-range stuff is utter garbage.

On the processor end... kind of sucks to see that you have an FX processor. I've seen Phenom II x4's outplay their "successors" in multiple tests. If you were gaming/doing work with some editing/multitasking, I would've opted for an i5 2500k or a 3770k although they are a little bit more pricey. I don't know which i7 you were using when comparing the two, but it is almost unanimous that AMD's bulldozer processors were utter disappointments for this day and age. Even the AMD lovers on Overclockers/Tom's Hardware have admitted that the old phenom's were more 'phenomenal' at performing than the Bulldozers. Graphics card wise.... I think Nvidia wins until you get to the HD 7850's where AMD starts to roll on par/price and even performs a little bit better. I dish out the extra money on Nvidia cards because of driver support, but if you're going mid-range, stick to Nvidia.

[d4u7211]

Honestly I've used two different i7 processors - maybe I didn't get the full advantage from them because they were in laptops (ASUS make, the specs were good) but the i7's choked every once in a while (plus i think that the pricing is ridiculous on intel processors)

intel does put out better stuff but it's to the point where i feel like i'm being cheated if i don't find a significant increase as an opposition to an AMD product that is competing with it. I'd rather save 30 to 50 bucks than gamble on getting slightly better performance. If i was willing to shell out more money I'd go to a higher tier.

Notice that all the above was kind of my mentality when buying 1.5 years ago.

Now, I feel the gap between the two companies is becoming larger, though, and intel is just keeping up with the times better, so my next processor - unless AMD somehow cranks out some seriously good shit later - will probably be intel.

AMD's 6 core processors do pretty damn well considering multitasking, etc though. I dunno if I would say the same for the 8-cores though.

Thanks for your input, overall I might as well snag the GTX 650 Ti. It has a good performance jump for an extra 15 bucks so why not

[Fission]

Originally Posted by PriestREA

In my experiences with AMD, they are nothing but a sub-par company releasing sub-par products as an ill geared attempt to "compete" with nVidia and Intel. Granted, their high end GPU's have started to put up some amazing numbers, but their mid-range and low-range stuff is utter garbage.

On the processor end... kind of sucks to see that you have an FX processor. I've seen Phenom II x4's outplay their "successors" in multiple tests. If you were gaming/doing work with some editing/multitasking, I would've opted for an i5 2500k or a 3770k although they are a little bit more pricey. I don't know which i7 you were using when comparing the two, but it is almost unanimous that AMD's bulldozer processors were utter disappointments for this day and age. Even the AMD lovers on Overclockers/Tom's Hardware have admitted that the old phenom's were more 'phenomenal' at performing than the Bulldozers. Graphics card wise.... I think Nvidia wins until you get to the HD 7850's where AMD starts to roll on par/price and even performs a little bit better. I dish out the extra money on Nvidia cards because of driver support, but if you're going mid-range, stick to Nvidia.

^^

pretty much that post, yeah

Originally Posted by d4u7211

maybe I didn't get the full advantage from them because they were in laptops

yes, that is exactly why

Originally Posted by d4u7211

(ASUS make, the specs were good) but the i7's choked every once in a while (plus i think that the pricing is ridiculous on intel processors)

probably overheating or your clock rate is being throttled

[Kibblre]

By the way, trying to determine the performance of a CPU by just cores and speed is a very small amount of it. There's a ton more that is way more complex. Also, at a middle level GPU, I think you don't need that powerful of a CPU since it's not going to bottleneck the GPU. An i5 is sufficient for gaming in most cases.

[d4u7211]

right, I was speaking of CPU performance alone, I don't look at CPU power with GPU, I treat them separately unless they are radically different

edit: radically different speeds, etc