GPU Buying Guide - (Read first post)

It just doesn't make sense. I was running an HD 4250 with 1GB of DDR3 memory on an Athlon 64, and I could play HD video and YouTube without any issues at all. Honestly, I think you might have some other junk clogging up your system—viruses, toolbars, malware, who knows? Just clean out your PC and see what happens. That computer should be more than enough to handle movies...

driftingpilot8 said:thanks for the reply

But what about the difference between GDDR3 and GDDR5? There should be a noticeable gap there. Can I actually leverage any of the advantages of version 5 over 3 using my current (older) card? Right now, I'm just stuck in the middle of nowhere trying to figure out😁what can be combined or utilized here.
And I noticed that prices for the 5 series are starting at only $450...

Look, DDR5 won't make a dent in your day-to-day tasks or while you're watching videos; that kind of bandwidth matters way more for gaming performance. If you're dealing with weak integrated graphics, then those basic GPUs mentioned are perfectly sufficient for your needs.

Andrew Fox74 said:It just doesn't make sense! I was running HD content and YouTube on an Athlon 64 using an HD 4350 with 1GB of DDR3 memory without a single hiccup. I also think you might have some other junk clogging things up (viruses, toolbars, malware... clean your PC and see), because that rig should be more than enough to play movies...

Oh yeah, let's go there then. Or maybe they're all lost in the woods? 🙄I'd bet anything my computer is cleaner than yours has ever been. When someone comes out of nowhere and, instead of actually sticking to the topic, starts dumping a mountain of garbage that can only be picked up by total amateurs—you know, the kind of people surfing sketchy sites and blindly clicking "OK" on everything until they've accidentally installed half a dozen programs—well, it makes me wonder why I even bother keeping AV, Spybot, and Malwarebytes installed...
Sorry for the OT, but... what the hell?

I've actually got a 1TB Western Digital Green. Sure, it's not exactly breaking any speed records, but I picked it on purpose because it stays way cooler!

Timothy Kim60 said:DDR5 isn't really doing anything for you if you're just doing basic tasks or watching videos, right? That kind of stuff matters way more for gaming performance. If you're dealing with a weak integrated chip, then those basic GPUs mentioned should be plenty enough.

That’s that!
thanks!

This is such a killer site for comparing specs!
http://www.hwcompare.com/10153/radeo...n-hd-6450-oem/

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but this is probably the absolute worst site for reviews and comparisons I've ever seen. 😉

http://www.hwcompare.com/11956/gefor...adeon-hd-7770/

The HD 7770 is a bit faster, I guess...

It’s true, the site just compares raw GPU specs—which is completely pointless if the architectures aren't even the same (let alone being several generations apart). Just look at the example crimsonstag84 provided above; someone looking for help is going to be led down the wrong path instead of actually getting any useful guidance.

Let's say you were trying to compare an old BMW V12 engine to a modern V8. It just doesn't work that way.

driftingpilot8 said:Yeah, sure, let's go there. Or maybe they're just lost in the woods. 🙄 I'd bet anything my rig is cleaner than yours ever was. When someone suddenly drops a mountain of junk out of nowhere instead of actually sticking to the topic—junk that you can only get if you're part of that clueless crowd surfing sketchy sites and blindly clicking "OK" until you've installed half a dozen viruses—well, it makes me wonder why I bother running AV, Spybot, and Malwarebytes in the first place...
Sorry for the OT, but... what the hell?

Based on your posts, it wasn't exactly obvious that you were some kind of "IT wizard," so I was just trying to offer a solution that might help (and maybe $167) in case the PC hasn't been properly maintained.

I apologize if I insulted your IT intelligence; that definitely wasn't my intention.🙄

So, I've decided to grab an HD 5450

But check this out—on the first page over here
and then on the first page right here

they've got like 5 or 6 different versions of that 5450, all with different price tags. It’s driving me crazy because if they all have the exact same clock speeds and memory specs, what's the deal? What's the actual difference?

Plus, looking at other sites, I see that for maybe $20-$83 you can find an HD 5450 with either 512MB or 1024MB of memory, and some are 32-bit while others are 64-bit. It makes zero sense! There’s gotta be some kind of catch or difference, right?

Since I'm basically a total newbie here, I figured I'd ask 😁: how big is the jump between 32 vs 64-bit, or 512 vs 1024MB? And why on earth aren't the prices reflecting those differences?
Oh, and I also see the HD 6450 listed... is it actually worth paying more for that one?
Man 😵
I'd feel like a complete idiot if I just went out and bought the first one I saw without asking first!

These are all essentially the same card—they all run on the same 5450 GPU. The only real differences are the manufacturer, the cooling setup (whether it's passive or active), and whether you're getting the 512MB or 1GB version. To be honest, I haven't heard much about any 32-bit versions worth mentioning—if you have a choice, just go with 64-bit. I’d suggest picking up an Asus or MSI model because they offer a solid 3-year warranty. Also, I wouldn't recommend using Edigital Shop (especially if you aren't living right in downtown Chicago)—you'll likely deal with long shipping delays, and if you ever need to file a warranty claim, you could be waiting months for a resolution.

The HD 6450 is a newer model and slightly more powerful, but honestly, that won't make a difference for what you're doing.
I'd suggest grabbing this one or this one. Both come with a 3-year warranty, feature 64-bit/1GB specs, and use passive cooling. They are practically in the exact same class.

I mean, what I'm getting at is... can't the 512 MB and 1024 MB memory be the same? Or maybe the MHz speed?

I'm just looking at this XtremeDigital stuff as a way to compare:

Sapphire PCIe HD 5450 512MB DDR3 - DirectX 11, ATI Eyefinity
-proc 650mhz, 512 MB, memory speed 1600 mhz, 64bit

Sapphire PCIe HD 5450 1GB HM
650 mhz, 1 GB, 1334 mhz, 64bit

Sapphire PCIe HD 5450 1GB GDDR3
650 mhz, 1 GB, 1600 mhz, 64bit

ASUS AMD EAH5450 1GB
650 mhz, 1 GB, 900 mhz, 32 bit (!)

Asus PCIe EAH5450 SILENT/DI/1GD3(LP) 1GB GDDR3
650 mhz, 1GB, 800 mhz, 64bit

Gigabyte PCIe GV-R545-1GI - HD 5450
650 mhz, 1 GB, 1100 mhz, 64 bit

***Look, when it comes to price, performance, and actual logic, something just feels off here. It totally reminds me of when I was shopping for a monitor! You know, how you could find all sorts of weird ratios for contrast, viewing angles, FPS, shading, and all those other "made-up" performance specs... until I finally just grabbed the cheapest IPS panel, which honestly is in a league of its own!

I honestly don't get how you can't even watch YouTube or HD movies without stuttering when you've got that much RAM and integrated graphics...

Before you buy anything, try installing Windows with the latest drivers for your hardware and see if that fixes things.

Just so I'm not talking nonsense... I'm running integrated graphics too, but I only have 2 GB of RAM... with 256 MB allocated to the GPU... on Windows (HD 4250)

Windows runs just fine... all my videos work, whether it's YouTube or downloaded movies, at both 720p and 1080p.

That was my setup for almost two years... and I even played quite a few games on that same integrated chip.

I only recently picked up a dedicated graphics card... and now there's a noticeable difference.

For the stuff you're trying to do, integrated graphics shouldn't just be able to handle it... it should breeze through it without breaking a sweat.

driftingpilot8 said:I mean, can't 512 and 1024 MB be basically the same thing? Or maybe even the MHz speed?

I think that XtremeDigital stuff is just there for comparison:

Look, you don't really need to care about those technical specs; they're all pretty much the same card. That 1GB thing is mostly just marketing because they're too slow to actually use that much memory anyway, and you won't feel a 100MHz difference anywhere. Just look for passive cooling—those tiny fans tend to be loud and they die way too often, then you're stuck trying to find an identical replacement. I'd probably go with this:

Robert Rodriguez2 said:I just don't get how you can't watch YouTube or HD movies without stuttering when you have that much RAM and integrated graphics...

Maybe try installing Windows with the latest drivers for your hardware before you buy anything, just to see if that helps.

Yeah, I'm wondering the same thing. 😕 I'd almost guess it's an old socket 478 board with a VIA chip, but since it's newer, it's got HD 3000 inside.

Look, 800 is half of 1600. I definitely get that part! 😁

Robert Rodriguez2 said:I just don't get how you can't watch YouTube or HD movies without everything stuttering when you've got that much RAM and integrated graphics...

Before you buy anything, why not try installing Windows with the latest drivers for your specific hardware? Just see how it performs first!

I just want to make sure I'm not talking nonsense here... I'm running on an integrated chip too, except I've only got 2 GB of RAM... and 256 MB of that is allocated to the GPU... running Windows (using an HD 4250)

And honestly, Windows runs totally fine for me... all my videos play smoothly, whether it's YouTube or downloaded movies, at 720p or even 1080p.

I've been rolling like this for almost two years... and hey, I've even played quite a few games on that same integrated setup!

It was only recently that I finally picked up a dedicated graphics card... and man, you can really feel the difference...

For the kind of stuff you're doing and what you mentioned, integrated graphics shouldn't just be able to handle it... they should breeze through it without breaking a sweat!

Your card lets you allocate system memory, whereas mine doesn't. Plus, yours has a processor that's nearly twice as fast. Your card supports DirectX 9, while the 4250 handles DirectX 10. Basically, yours is just newer.
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-42...adeon-3000-IGP
What am I even supposed to say? Am I being too pushy? Maybe I should be the one taking advice instead of giving it? Is there anyone else out there who has a card three times better than mine and still has zero issues? Why are you guys picking on me? 😛

It's a 5 across the board, you just missed the fact that his is integrated too. So, those cards are pretty much identical:

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-42...adeon-3000-IGP

fadedorca66 said:They're all 5 series. You just missed the card because his is integrated too. These cards are basically twins:

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-42...adeon-3000-IGP

Yep, mine's integrated too!

Okay, I think I finally cracked the code on what's actually different here!
They're all using the exact same HD 5450 graphics card, but check out those clock speeds—900, 1000, and 1333 MHz. It’s almost certainly just some factory overclocking at work, right?
Also, turns out that last one (the V2 model) is running on a 32-bit architecture, while all the others, like the V8 and the rest, are actually 64-bit.

You're still stressing over that? 😁

Thanks for the help, everyone. Ended up grabbing an AMD Radeon R9 270 X on Craigslist... only a few months old with nearly two years of warranty left. My only real worry is the power supply being a bit weak, but hopefully my Corsair CX430M doesn't flake out on me.

The PSU isn't the issue; it's more than enough for that GPU