Which VGA is better?

C

CaptainBri

New Member
Hi guys,

Which one would be better?

GeForce GTX 260

or

GeForce GTS 250

Im not quite sure which one to get.

It is for gaming btw.
 
Last edited:
The GTX 275 beat the 4890 in most benchmarks but not by a lot, maybe a couple of FPS. When you get into cards that perform that well those couple FPS won't be noticeable, considering most people don't notice any difference above 30 fps.
 
kookooshortman55 said:
The GTX 275 beat the 4890 in most benchmarks but not by a lot, maybe a couple of FPS. When you get into cards that perform that well those couple FPS won't be noticeable, considering most people don't notice any difference above 30 fps.
Click to expand...

actually, its more like 60. the human eye cant see more than 60 (or maybe its 70) or so fps. so anything above that isnt noticeable.
 
dubesinhower said:
actually, its more like 60. the human eye cant see more than 60 (or maybe its 70) or so fps. so anything above that isnt noticeable.
Click to expand...

It actually depends on the person, i mean i can tell the difference between 60and 120hz if you take a look at one of those 120hz televisions with something at 120hz, you can tell its smoother than 60hz or 29.97hz(Standard ntsc).
 
so its either HD 4890 and gtx 275

lol i dont know i'm still thinkin my self

If i cant afford either 4890 or 275 then i'm goign to tsick with gts 260+ and or hd 4870 which i prefer than 260+ lol

Hmmmmmm

How bout gtx 285?
 
bomberboysk said:
Isnt hz and fps related/very similar? hz is refresh rate/second, which refers to maximum frames per second right?
Click to expand...
Hz generally refers to the maximum refresh rate that a display can support, most LCD's can only support up to a 60Hz refresh rate. Movies, games, etc. are measured in FPS since it's how many frames the video displays per second.
 
[-0MEGA-];1228863 said:
Hz generally refers to the maximum refresh rate that a display can support, most LCD's can only support up to a 60Hz refresh rate. Movies, games, etc. are measured in FPS since it's how many frames the video displays per second.
Click to expand...

Yeah, what i was saying is you can tell the difference though in one of those newer 120hz lcd tv's and a 60hz/~30hz tv, but essentially in games and such above 60fps isnt necessary as most lcd's wont be able to display any faster than that anyhow.
 
mx344 said:
260 is better, the 250 is a renamed 9800GTX i beleive.
Click to expand...

Well not "just" renamed its also smaller it will easily fit in mini-atx cases which I love.

I recently upgraded my grandparents rig with one and was pleasantly surprised. at how small it was...my grandma had a game she couldn't play which shocked me since most of her games are like "arcade" type.

The 260 will handle ANY gaming needs for the end of the year...unless you want to run at ungodly settings...which you would have asked the 295 vs 4870x2 instead :P
 
dubesinhower said:
actually, its more like 60. the human eye cant see more than 60 (or maybe its 70) or so fps. so anything above that isnt noticeable.
Click to expand...

I think I heard 72 somewhere

I personally like at least 60 for shooters, 40 for racing, and 20 for rpgs

I used to play halo and if the fps ever dropped under 85 (my refresh rate) I would play worse
 
bomberboysk said:
Yeah, what i was saying is you can tell the difference though in one of those newer 120hz lcd tv's and a 60hz/~30hz tv, but essentially in games and such above 60fps isnt necessary as most lcd's wont be able to display any faster than that anyhow.
Click to expand...
Which is true, it's usually when the frame rate drops below 60 where people notice it.

I hate watching movies on a 120Hz TV, everything seems so sped up, and a lot of movies are played somewhat slowly for a more dramatic effect, which is removed on the faster displays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top