Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GT 430/520 or GTX 560 Ti

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GT 430/520 or GTX 560 Ti

    I know they're entirely different cards, but I doubt the 430 will be good enough for the occasional gaming I want to do.*
    I know about the 520, but by all accounts it's actually weaker than the 430 for gaming, & no better when it come to VA.
    It is however a fair bit more power efficient....
    The 560 would be just a power efficient as the 430, when only being used for VA right?

    Finally, despite being lower power, cards like the 430** don't seem to be available in truly single-slot form-factors, even w/after-market air or water cooling solutions!
    That was the last time I checked, admittedly it has been a few months now...

    I'd prefer a single-slot WC solution over a single-slot air cooling one, but it seems WC vendors only like to focus on mid to high-end cards.
    At least last time I checked....
    That being the case, there is single-slot WC solution's for the GTX 560 Ti, which makes it even more compelling!

    So just wondering what everyone reckons I should go far.
    Are you aware of cooling solution's for the 430/520 that I'm not aware of?
    Perhaps you feel the 520 is as good as the 430 for gaming, & equal or better for VA?
    Everything I've read about the two suggests otherwise...
    Based on what I've read/know, I'm leaning mostly towards GTX560Ti.
    I read about the GTX560, it doesn't seem like a compelling buy (yet) when carefully compared to the Ti.

    *I'm a very light PC gamer, but when I do play, I want the option of playing the most recent/demanding games.
    **not so sure about 520, haven't bothered investigating heavily because it's gaming is poorer than 430 (which is already avg).

  • #2
    Originally posted by jalyst View Post
    I know they're entirely different cards, but I doubt the 430 will be good enough for the occasional gaming I want to do.*
    I know about the 520, but by all accounts it's actually weaker than the 430 for gaming, & no better when it come to VA.
    It is however a fair bit more power efficient....
    The 560 would be just a power efficient as the 430, when only being used for VA right?

    Finally, despite being lower power, cards like the 430** don't seem to be available in truly single-slot form-factors, even w/after-market air or water cooling solutions!
    That was the last time I checked, admittedly it has been a few months now...

    I'd prefer a single-slot WC solution over a single-slot air cooling one, but it seems WC vendors only like to focus on mid to high-end cards.
    At least last time I checked....
    That being the case, there is single-slot WC solution's for the GTX 560 Ti, which makes it even more compelling!

    So just wondering what everyone reckons I should go far.
    Are you aware of cooling solution's for the 430/520 that I'm not aware of?
    Perhaps you feel the 520 is as good as the 430 for gaming, & equal or better for VA?
    Everything I've read about the two suggests otherwise...
    Based on what I've read/know, I'm leaning mostly towards GTX560Ti.
    I read about the GTX560, it doesn't seem like a compelling buy (yet) when carefully compared to the Ti.

    *I'm a very light PC gamer, but when I do play, I want the option of playing the most recent/demanding games.
    **not so sure about 520, haven't bothered investigating heavily because it's gaming is poorer than 430 (which is already avg).
    Well the big question is at what resolution do you plan on gaming at and is the gaming going to be native linux apps which tend to have a much lower system requirement then windows games. I would however lean to the GTX 560 if you want the maximum length of years of service over a wide selection of uses.

    Comment


    • #3
      Definitely Windows for gaming, no question.
      I might dabble in a little Linux gaming, but rarely.
      You know, I've never bothered googling much about my plasma until now.
      It's one that I won from my local shopping centre about 12mths ago.

      http://www.google.com.au/search?q=pd...w=1280&bih=832
      http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum....cfm?t=1673556

      If the poster in the thread above's correct...
      It looks like it might not really have HD resolution
      *EDIT*
      Just looking at the manual & the specs are:

      42" diagonal
      16:9
      1024(H)x768(V)
      16.77million
      1500cd/m
      10000:1 (typical)
      PAL
      HDMI connectors x2
      VGA input X1
      PC Audio input x1
      Video input x2
      S-Video input x1
      YPbPr input x2
      USB x1

      OMFG... RIPPED OFF!!
      Well, being such low resolution, at least the 430 might still be an option.
      Sigh.....
      Last edited by jalyst; 05-20-2011, 01:26 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Assuming I do eventually get a much better 42" screen (maybe slightly smaller)
        I assume your suggestion would be an unequivocal: GTX 560 Ti?

        Do you know the answers to any of the specific questions in my OP?
        Thank-you/night.

        Comment


        • #5
          560 Ti is gaming card. Has good wine support, so you wont need windows at all.
          Some of the linux games do demand good gfx card.
          The only problem with 4xx and 5xx series is opengl software slowdown, you can read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_400_Series
          430 and 530 are office cards, the only reason to get it is vdpau.

          I got gtx 260 sp 216 1792mb ram, no such bug, good for gaming, but eats way more than comparable amd ... on windows. Payed 70€ for it.
          On idle nvidia and amd are mostly equal - 30-40 watts. Only exceptions at 9800 gx2 and 4890 etc.

          Yeah, so if AMD won't fck their linux drivers up, I would be having 2gb version of hd5870.
          If you even think of gaming, get 560 ti.
          Last edited by crazycheese; 05-20-2011, 04:16 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jalyst View Post
            1024(H)x768(V)
            16.77million
            1500cd/m
            10000:1 (typical)
            This is extremely normal resolution for plasma.
            I don't even understand why you would buy plasma...

            1. Eats huge amount of electricity.
            2. Burns out after 5 years.
            3. Low resolutions(some recent models try to achive hdready, not seen fullhd plasma yet)
            4. Weight

            Why not get 200-400Hz OLED 3d capable LCD?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
              560 Ti is gaming card. Has good wine support, so you wont need windows at all. Some of the linux games do demand good gfx card.
              Interesting, I'll try WINE & Win7, I intend to dual-boot -for various reasons- anyway.

              The only problem with 4xx and 5xx series is opengl software slowdown, you can read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_400_Series
              I wasn't aware of that issue, thanks for pointing it out!

              430 and 530 are office cards, the only reason to get it is vdpau.
              If you even think of gaming, get 560 ti.
              Well I believe certain games are still quite playable on the 430, I think the 520 is a bit too weak though...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                This is extremely normal resolution for plasma.
                I don't even understand why you would buy plasma...
                As mentioned in prior post, it was a prize I won.
                At the time i thought:
                "Great, no need to waste time researching/buying a decent size/IQ TV screen!"
                How wrong I was... sigh...

                1. Eats huge amount of electricity.
                2. Burns out after 5 years.
                3. Low resolutions(some recent models try to achive hdready, not seen fullhd plasma yet)
                4. Weight
                Last time I looked closely at TV display technologies (admittedly some time ago)...
                Plasma was a favorite amongst some videophiles for it's qualities, power consumption was not one of those qualities.

                I was not aware Plasma is still limited to non-HD resolutions, are you sure?
                I'm surprised by that & if it's true, then I guess I'll have to rule-it-out as the basis for my next screen?!

                Why not get 200-400Hz OLED 3d capable LCD?
                Is this display tech inferior or equal to plasma in some ways, or is it better in every single way?
                Do you know of any excellent/in-depth comparative analysis?

                Any suggestions for specific makes/models? (I love what Samsung's been doing in recent years)
                I'd prefer to stay @42", but if that means cost is going be much more than $500, then I'm prepared to go sub-42".
                If I'd realised the limitations of my TV longer ago, I'd have set aside much more than $500.
                Unfortunately I can no longer afford much more than $500
                Last edited by jalyst; 05-21-2011, 04:15 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The first Fermi nvidia chips (nvidia 4xx cards) have flaws, specially on power consumption , its idle / full load power consuption are high!. Your best bet if you like nvidia hardware / drivers is to go for a most modern nvidia 5xx card.

                  Plasma no way, too much power consumption. A good LED monitor matches plasma quality with much less power consumption. I would recommend a samsung monitor, they obtain always very good reviews from tv / monitors review specialist sites.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks mate, do you the answer to any of my other Qns? in prior posts.

                    These look like the only TV's on the Australian Samsung site that look even remotely affordable:
                    http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/t...XY&view_gb=ALL

                    Their RRP is still waaay more than my $500 limit...
                    But they're still relatively cheap, compared to some of the other 40" (or more) screens on that site.

                    Geezus!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      These are the prior Qns/statements I've not yet had direct responses to:

                      (1)
                      The 560 would be just a power efficient as the 520, when only being used for VA right?

                      (2)
                      Finally, despite being lower power, cards like the 430 don't seem to be available in truly single-slot form-factors, even w/after-market air or water cooling solutions!
                      That was the last time I checked, admittedly it has been a few months now...


                      (3)
                      I'd prefer a single-slot WC solution over a single-slot air cooling one, but it seems WC vendors only like to focus on mid to high-end cards.
                      At least last time I checked....


                      (4) <--same as (2) really
                      Are you aware of cooling solution's for the 430/520 that I'm not aware of?

                      (5)
                      Perhaps you feel the 520 is as good as the 430 for gaming, & equal or better for VA?

                      (6)
                      Assuming I do eventually get a truly HD 42" screen (maybe slightly smaller)
                      I assume your suggestion would be an unequivocal: GTX 560/Ti?


                      (7)
                      Last time I looked closely at TV display technologies (admittedly some time ago)...
                      Plasma was a favourite amongst some videophiles for it's qualities, power consumption was not one of those qualities.


                      (8)
                      I was not aware Plasma is still limited to non-HD resolutions, are you sure?
                      I'm surprised by that & if it's true, then I guess I'll have to rule-it-out as the basis for my next screen?!


                      (9)
                      Is a 200-400Hz OLED/3d LCD inferior or equal to a Plasma in some ways, or is it better in every single way?

                      (10)
                      Do you know of any excellent/in-depth comparative analysis between the two (& other) display techs?

                      (11)
                      Any suggestions for specific makes/models? (I love what Samsung's been doing in recent years)
                      I'd prefer to stay @42", but if that means cost is going be much more than $1k (in order to maintain best IQ), then I'm prepared to go sub-42".


                      Answers or thoughts on any are very much appreciated, thank-you!
                      Last edited by jalyst; 05-21-2011, 06:01 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by jalyst View Post
                        Thanks mate, do you the answer to any of my other Qns? in prior posts.

                        These look like the only TV's on the Australian Samsung site that look even remotely affordable:
                        http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/t...XY&view_gb=ALL

                        Their RRP is still waaay more than my $500 limit...
                        But they're still relatively cheap, compared to some of the other 40" (or more) screens on that site.

                        Geezus!
                        The superb samsung TVs begin with the 6000 serie. Currently there are cheap 6000 serie samsung TVs on the market, read this:

                        http://ledhdtvtelevisions.com/samsung-led-tv-series/

                        http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsu...0100506527.htm
                        Last edited by Jimbo; 05-21-2011, 07:31 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I still dont get why you would need a low end nvidia card. You cpu has got vaapi accelleration for h264 (xbmc can use it) and should be stable already (compared to sandy bridge which still can be a tiny bit problematic). If you want to play current games low end cards are not much better than onboard solutions. For games in full hd with high gfx detail a gtx 460/560 is usually the minimum, a 560 ti would be a smart choice if you have got the money left. Lowend cards are lost money just for video accelleration when your onboard solution can do that as well - and even need energy for nothing. Currently just vlc+libav/ffmpeg git does not enable vaapi (the same applies for nvidia cards, as they need a wrapper from vdpau to vaapi in that case), but mplayer vaapi or xbmc should be fine. Try and see... Use Kanotix with some of my scripts when your current distro does not allow to test this.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Jimbo View Post
                            The superb samsung TVs begin with the 6000 serie. Currently there are cheap 6000 serie samsung TVs on the market, read this:
                            http://ledhdtvtelevisions.com/samsung-led-tv-series/
                            http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/samsu...0100506527.htm
                            None of those come up on the Aussie site for me. (see the link I provided)
                            Admittedly my upper RRP limit was $2100 from memory.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Kano View Post
                              <SNIP>
                              Fair enough mate, I was already erring towards 560 Ti, you got me 100% decided.
                              No more questions directly relating to the lower end cards.
                              I don't suppose you can help with any of these remaining questions:

                              (1)
                              The 560 Ti would be just a power efficient as the 520, when only being used for VA right?

                              (2)
                              Assuming I do eventually get a 1080p 42" screen (maybe slightly smaller)
                              I imagine a GT430/520 wouldn't be an option period for any relatively modern PC game?


                              (3) [statement; but still interested in some reflections on this if possible]
                              Last time I looked closely at TV display technologies (admittedly some time ago)...
                              Plasma was a favourite amongst some videophiles for it's qualities, power consumption was not one of those qualities.


                              (4)
                              I was not aware Plasma is still limited to non-HD resolutions, are you sure?
                              I'm surprised by that & if it's true, then I won't consider Plasmas at all for my next TV


                              (5)
                              Is a 200-400Hz LED LCD inferior or equal to a Plasma in some ways, or is it better in every respect?

                              (6)
                              Do you know of any excellent comparative analysis between the two (& other) display techs?

                              (7)
                              Any suggestions for specific makes/models? (I love what Samsung's been doing in recent years)
                              I'd prefer to stay @42", but if that means cost will be much more than $1k...
                              And in order to maintain the best IQ), then I'm prepared to go sub-42".


                              Thanks everyone for your time/help.
                              Last edited by jalyst; 05-21-2011, 11:15 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X