4850 or 8800 GT

what do you prefer ?
i dunno which i need .

GTX 260.

Most places still have the 8800GT at the same price as it was at, and the 260 is twice as fast.

Also:
http://www.techspot.com/review/109-geforce-gtx-260-280-versus-radeon-4850-4870/page2.html

As you can see, GTX 260 = more ram, more speed, same price as the 4850.

4850

The same price?..Maybe in the US.

In the UK, and I suspect the rest of Europe, there's quite a big price difference between the two (~£80+ in the UK).

Get the 4850.

Yan:
That page isn't up to date. The GTX 260 and 280 aren't even mentioned on it.

There are rumours about nVidias G8X and G9X series failing due to heat problems at a high rate, so you might want to hold off on that until the smoke has cleared....

Panno, what are your other system specs? It usually doesn't make much sense to put a high-end graphics card into an otherwise low-end computer, and likewise a lousy graphics card can be the performance bottle-neck for an otherwise powerful system.

I put an 8800GT in my Quad Core Mac Pro yesterday, and it runs Crysis at 1920x1200 at playable framerates on Vista 32 Bit, DX10 and with 'high' settings. But it's quite obvious that this is as far as the system will go, and I doubt that a better graphics card without a simultaneous CPU upgrade would make much sense.

You're right though about the price.

Here's the numbers:
The GTX 260 is $329. The 4850 is $199.
The GTX has 896mb of ram. The 4850 has 512mb.

The GTX costs 1.65x as much.
The GTX gives you 1.75x as much ram.
And in 3D Mark and Crysis, the GTX is 1.25x as fast.

So, spend a 65% more and you get 75% higher res textures, and 25% more FPS.

Those aren't the only factors to consider of course.

Noise level:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964-16.html

The 4850 wins here. But I have a GTX 260, and it seems fairly quiet to me, so even though it's louder than the 4850, it's not really loud.

I had an 8800 GTS and it failed on me, that's why I have the GTX 260 now.

I wonder if maybe the thermal paste they used is just crap. I'll take the old card apart and check it at some point.

i use c2d 4300 @ 3 GHz with 2 GB Ram and

a cd 2200 @ 3.3 GHz with 2 GB RAM i mean its enough speed for a cool GFX Card.

low cost tip cd 2220
http://www.tomshardware.com/de/Pentium-Dual-Core-E2140-E2220-E2180,testberichte-240062.html

Nah. Apparently it's a problem with the die layout (the chips are defective), and anyone who has one will eventually burn through it.

Until nVidia change their "What, me worry?" attitude, stop lying about facts that any idiot can check up on, and start addressing the problem, I'd buy ATi.

Hm... Get the 4850. After reading up on these issues with Nvidia's chips I'm suddenly rethinking my decision to get the GTX 260. (Plus I had a hell of a time getting it to work with my LCD screen which only had an HDMI input.)

I looked up plenty of comments on both not too long ago as I was preparing to build my next make, and from the comments I took it that the 8800 was a powerhouse and the 4850 was more stable.

If you want power, check around for some benchmarks and compare for your uses.

If you want ATI, get a 4850 or 4870
If you want NVIDIA get a 9800GTX(+) (the 4850 counterpart at the same price) or GTX260 if you want future-unproof technology

The GTX definitely is a dead end series, NVIDIA will have to come up with some new ideas for the next generation, because the way they are currently going will lead to some new form factor to fit their plain stupid die sizes on and cool it.

Currently the fastest card with best price / performance ratio clearly is the 4870 which competes with the GTX280 at the price (and lower) of a GTX260 (here in europe)

So the 'August 2008' round up is out of date?

I've either, unknowingly, slipped through some kind of time warp or the 'best value' guide doesn't mention the GTX280/60 simply because they're not, at this point in time, good value for money.

The GTX260 rocks and is decent value now that its around £200.
It's a bit silly to say the GTX is a dead end series, both makers have already said this would be the last generation of the big GPU; ATI have just started the move towards multi core quicker.

i get an 8800 gt for 50 euro from ebay now
thx

4850, all the way. I really am a big Nvidia fan but ATI have edged ahead with the 4850 and 4870.

4850 for the price. You can get one for 150 USD now. The 4870 is still too expensive compared to 4850 but very good. The newer ATI that will come out in a month or two will be much better:
http://www.techpowerup.com/78670/AMD_Sets_RV775_to_Chase_Down_G200b?.html


(RV770 = 4850 and 4870, RV775 = new replacement models)

i got a sapphire 4850 for under £110 at pcworld back in august and it's a great card for games at that price.

Strange, as it is still about £135 on other internet sites now.

Pc world were chargin about £189 for the 3850 at the same store!!

If it's purely for games then the 4850, if running 3d apps or opengl is needed then always go with nvidia.
Most of the nvidia overheat rumours appear to have been started by charlie on tomshardware...all he does is slam nvidia so anything he says has to be taken with a dump truck full of salt; a pc with decent cooling should be fine.