Mainstream Graphics Today

Much of the time integrated graphics solutions are enough for business or casual computing needs, but when they are not there needs to be an affordable next step up in the current generation of hardware. Low end cards are generally not designed with gaming in mind, but that doesn't mean that they are not important to gaming.

Many are interested in this low level of add-in graphics card. The volumes on these parts are much higher than at other price points. Some people don't need to worry about 3D and others as non-gamers and non-tech-savvy are not interested in looking past marketing (and also desire a low price). They either don't know or don't care about the kinds of applications that will have a tough time performing well on their systems.

The reason this impacts PC gaming and game development is because publishers are not going to limit the potential sales of their games to consumers who are already gamers and have at least mid-range graphics cards. In order to attract the money that studios need to develop games on the scale that is the current trend, the target market needs to include a much greater slice of PC owners. It needs to reach down to at least the 9500 GT, if not integrated graphics.

We've said this just about every time we've published an article on lower end hardware: the low end is an anchor tied to the neck of game developers. Well, that's not entirely fair, as the previous generation acts the same way as not everyone with a graphics card upgrades every 18 months. But that just means the low end of the previous generation is the real problem.

There are a lot of amazing things possible with the latest and greatest hardware. But not many developers have the time and energy to really focus on getting the most out of today's $400+ graphics solutions. The bulk of their time needs to be put in to making the game playable on the vast majority of hardware that is currently out there. Sure, sliders and settings exist that do make prettier pictures with more powerful computers, but if the bottom line were more powerful it would impact the performance and quality at every level.

The worst offenders are certainly still integrated solutions. These parts are notoriously slow. Even the faster offerings from AMD and NVIDIA, while the are superior to Intel's dismal graphics components, don't do us any favors. But the lowest end add-in cards, while offering quite a boost over integrated graphics in terms of performance, are still under performers in terms in terms of gaming.

Yes, we know that hardware guys can just give performance away for free. But while casual computer users who have something on this level of hardware will be less frustrated than integrated graphics users, they will still not likely be inspired by anything that is possible on their hardware either.

The value of getting real gaming experiences on mid-range to high end hardware with high production value games cannot be understated. Ever since the days of the Commodore 64 and the Atari ST, the general public has been shown ridiculous things that don't reflect game play. Even today there is an over abundance of time spent showing off cut scenes and non-interactive parts of games that aren't actual game play. People who don't already know what is and is not possible aren't going to buy into the hype.

The best thing that could happen for gaming is for lower end hardware to offer more power so that anyone who had an add-in graphics card could download any demo out there and experience a real taste of what is really possible rather than what they currently get.

Don't get us wrong here -- the industry has seen good steps up in performance on the low end and game developers fitting a good range of features into their titles that are at least playable on low end parts. We just want more. Intel integrated seems to be a lost cause at this point, and even NVIDIA and AMD need to step up their integrated segment as well. The low end parts are where the real war is fought and the future of PC gaming, in large part, is defined by the capabilities of this segment.

Ever wonder why consoles come out of the gate with better looking, better performing games than PCs seem capable of offering? It is because game programmers know exactly the hardware they have to work with and develop exclusively for that. Over the next 5 years, eventually the lowest end part that PC game developers are targeting meets or exceeds the performance of the hardware in consoles and for a short time PC game quality leads the curve (until the next next generation consoles come out with current generation mid-range parts and quality that blows the PC away once again).

If the graphics hardware industry is serious about PC gaming (and we firmly believe they need to be going forward), for the next round of console launches all the players in the graphics market need to be willing to come out with a low end part that meets (or comes really close to) the performance and capabilities of what ever graphics hardware is within the consoles.

Yes, there will still be a significant amount of older hardware in systems that developers will target for a time. But time the consoles spend on top will be significantly reduced, and if people could get the quality of a console on the computer they already own for about $75 rather than the three to four hundred dollar and higher prices of next gen consoles, imagine how many people would opt to upgrade their PC than to run out and buy a new console.

Leveling the playing field in terms of production value is one thing. Time and energy still need to be spent on quality and gameplay. Imagine how much more time can be spent on that if shoe horning graphical effects onto low quality hardware wasn't necessary and developers could spend more time making their game competitive by making it good rather than by making it look as good as possible on the crappy hardware they need to target.

Anyway, things aren't always the way they should be. We can dream quite a bit, but reality probably won't shift because we believe it to be in the best interest of the industry. We'll leave this topic and move on to the hardware that stands to limit the innovation of game developers for the next couple years.

The NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT goes up against the previous range of NVIDIA hardware from the 8500 GT to the 8600 GTS. As for competitors from AMD, we are looking at the Radeon HD 2400 series. Though we have yet to see AMD's refresh part yet, we will certainly be waiting and hoping to get more out of it than what we are expecting with the 9500 GT.

Index The Card
Comments Locked

37 Comments

View All Comments

  • djfourmoney - Sunday, September 7, 2008 - link

    HD4670 crushes it and its already available in Europe for 67-77 Euro depending on website. That's under $100-105US and while the 9600GT is around $150 online (before rebate) I don't ASSUME rebates will happen and I don't purchase based on rebates.

    For people with say Dell 530's like my mother's PC, most people can't afford to spend more than $100 or aren't willing too.

    Hardcore PC gamers should not confuse themselves with "average" PC users, you aren't one of them and they aren't one of you. If feel spending $200 on a card is justifted, I for one don't. I am a console loyalist that occasionally plays games on the PC. Now that my PC and Console and connected to the same monitor, I don't have to leave the room to play either. I plan on combining both, but I still have a PS2 and I haven't moved on to a PS3 yet and price really as nothing to do with it.

    I priced it out and its much cheaper for me to buy a few PC titles and a decent video card, than a PS3 used or new. MS just reduced the cost of the Xbox 360 to $199 and I recently talked a co-worker into buying a new PC and he gave his old one to his son. Great, however he wants to play Rock Band and ummm the current GPU won't cut it. I suggested a 9600GT at first, but I'll tell him to pick up a HD4670 and while it won't run quite as fast as the 9600GT, its close enough and the price is right. He was about to buy his son a Xbox 360, but I told him he could get a good card and that's one less thing he'll be buying his son for Xmas, since many Games For Windows titles are Xbox 360 titles too.

    The PC game market needs better titles more accessable games, accesable graphics. They should also look into selling bundled video cards with a few included titles, not just one. Most PC owners may only have one game, maybe too. As more people are connecting there PC's to HDTV's and using there PC's at Media Centers, this is yet another chance for the PC Game market to captialize on this.
  • frozentundra123456 - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    Another way to improve graphics upgradability on consumer PCs would be to build OEM computers with a better power supply. Almost any computer you buy from a best buy type store will have a power supply that is only around 300 watts. This limits upgrades from integrated graphics to an HD3650 or 9500GT type card, and even then the power supply is still marginal.

    I agree that spending 50 to 100 dollars more on the graphics card will give much better performance per dollar, but one then has to upgrade the power supply which adds another 100 dollars or so to the price. Also upgrading the power supply is something most non-technical users might not want to attempt, while simply dropping in a graphics card is something almost anyone can do.

    Since the manufacturer has to include a power supply anyway (obviously), how much more could it cost to make it 400 to 500 watts instead of 300?? The user would then be able to upgrade to a mid-level card instead of the low end without having to upgrade the power supply anyway.

  • GaryJohnson - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    The OEMs don't really have any incentive to do that. It would decrease profit and the average computer user wouldn't know the difference. Besides, they'd much rather you come back and buy a whole new PC from them when you decide you need an upgrade.
  • idealego - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    You can buy passively cooled 9500 GTs for about $70, maybe less. This appeals to some people for a number of reasons: it's cheap, it's silent, it has a low power supply requirement and some people simply don't play newer, demanding games.

    For example, I have a friend who plays nothing but WoW and has a crappy, big-brand computer with the stock power supply. For him this video card is perfect, as it's cheap, it's silent and and he can be fairly sure his power supply isn't going to have a problem with it.
  • VooDooAddict - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    You summed it up well.

    There are many people out there who only play World of Warcraft and web games.
  • feelingshorter - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    Strengths? ATI is already in the works to release their 4670, which beats the 9500GT by a very large margin. It was benchmarked on some chinese website. Infact nvidia is already in the works to also release a 9550GT in response.
  • idealego - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    I could have also said "the strengths of this class of video card". I don't care who has the best $70 card--the point is simply that these video cards fill a niche for some people.
  • feelingshorter - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    Unbelievable what nvidia is doing, releasing so many cards. 9400gt/9500gt/9600gt/9600GSO/9800gt/9800GTX. I was looking for a sub 100 video card but i think ill just put out more $ and buy a 4850.
  • tacoburrito - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link

    I think most of the low end cards are OEMs only. I'm guessing that the machines that churn out these GPUs are not reliable in producing chips capable of the same specs. This could be why Nvidia have to repackage them into a low end and sub-low end. Fuuny thing is that I don't see AMD with the same dilemna with their Radeon HD lineup.

    It is hard to even justify paying $70 for a card when a mere $50 more would net you a sub-high end 9800GT.
  • Clauzii - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link

    Nice article. It -looks- like nVidia need to up their midrange even more, since the prices keep them from doing much at the moment.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now