Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

As everyone knows, these two are very VGA couples in performance but not in price since 4850 has almost the same performance that a 9800gtx but is far more cheaply.

 

 

Obviously there is no better than the bechmark ourselves playing a good game and tested.

 

 

 

Ati 4850

4850ow4.jpg

 

nVidia 9800gtx

9800gtxxs5.jpg

 

 

 

 

CALL OF DUTY

codfm8.jpg

 

 

COMPANY OF HEROS

companywi5.jpg

 

 

CRYSIS

crysistv3.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

WHAT VGA CHOISE?

 

Personal experiencies?

 

 

Posted

It is a question of how much you have money and how much you play.

If you overclocker or player 24/7 for example, choose ATI.

By this you share here, i will chose cheapest.

 

Posted

knox , i been serchin prices and the Ati 4850 is arround 200$ (no creas q pesos xD) and the nVidia 9800gtx arround 300$

 

Spanish [ si la guita no es un inconveniente comprate la nVidia 9800gtx q parece una monstruosidad xD]

Posted

chose ati, :)

 

btw , HD4850 now cost from e-shop.gr 160eyro, if u will w8ing 1.5 month, its will be cost 70 eyro, like all grapgic cards, price's goes down crazy every month....

 

but ati for the win!!!!11...

 

and for ur pc can support this cards, like 9800 and 4850 , u need and good cpu/ram ..

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Posts

    • LIVE VERIFICATION? SUMSUB? “IMPOSSIBLE”? ▪ Spoiler: it is possible — if you know who to work with. A client came in with a task to pass **live verification** on **WantToPay**, a Telegram virtual card service. On the platform side — **Sumsub**: liveness check, SMS, manual review. “Fast” and “by eye” simply don’t work here. › What was done: → analyzed the verification scenario and Sumsub requirements → built the correct flow: phone number, email, timing → **completed live verification remotely, without account handover** → handled SMS and confirmation codes → brought the process to final approval ▪ Result: → verification passed → access granted → no flags or repeat requests ▪ Live verification is not luck. It’s scenario-based preparation — not hope. › TG: @mustang_service ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +6RAKokIn5ItmYjEx ) *All data is published with the client’s consent.* #verification #sumsub #livecheck #kyc #case
    • IMPORTANT INFO: In a few days, I will switch to completely new code, written from scratch with a new download system, patch building and management system. The Updater will become true 2026 code with "foolproof systems". I'm going to create a Discord server for customers to request new ideas and features. FIRST CUSTOMERS ARE ALREADY USING THE NEW UPDATER ON LIVE SERVERS! Watch this topic for upcoming info because the new updater is around the corner! Yes, you can still use self-update on the previous updater! No, the new updater won't be compatible with the old patch system! A new build is required, but players who already have game files won't have to download the entire patch again! New templates and updates to existing templates are coming soon! Sneak peek:  
    • i used guytis IL project and source. i found in his project there are 3 Client version source... 1,CliExt_H5   --->this one cant be compiled in VS2005,i did know why..is it for H5 client? 2,CliExtNew  --->this one is IL version ,but when i compiled it and use it.player cant login game,MD5Checksum wrong.i check the source code,but not found any hints. 3,L2Server    --->this one for HB client?im not sure...   so my question is what are the differences between these three versions of cliext.dll?how can i fix the issue of the MD5Checksum not matching problem?   01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [CCliExt::HandleCheckSum] Invalid Checksum[1130415144] vs [-721420287] packet[dd] len[29] sum[2698] key[30] HWID[] Account[]! 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, SocketLimiter::UserSocketBadunknownprotocol 11111111111 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [usersocket]unknown protocol from ip[113.137.149.115]!      
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This community uses essential cookies to function properly. Non-essential cookies and third-party services are used only with your consent. Read our Privacy Policy and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..