Radeon HD 5450  vs GeForce 210 

Obviously no

Wow you have some issues lol

It doesn't even matter your point is moot, broh, you heard his arguement, he got a game to run that wouldn't run Otherwise because of useless companies putting limitations on games' for no reason so you have to upgrade. If hes' happy running crappy cards' at shitty res, why do you care? And He gave you his Arguement, so he does' know what HE is talking about....I hate all of you damned trolls and your stupid arguements' for no reason, your so selfish, and rude, go milk your mom, or do something useful with your life..

<a href="http://minecraft24.net">minecraft24.net</a> thanks for sharing! I loved your informative post keep posting here!

Yeah, it is an stupid product that no one shuld buy.

Ok you are right on the most part but hey i am not wrong either because you can just grab a R7 240 instead for 70$ and actually DO stuff with it instead of getting 10-30fps on most AAA games made after 2010.

1. It doesn't matter if dx11 was around or not at that time, if it isn't made to support dx11 it simply won't run it, even on newer cards such as the GT210. 2. It doesn't matter what game it is running or if it is good or not, It's a game that requires dx11 so It's a perfect example. You just have proven Your incompetence at this topic.

Wut? OFC it didnt run coz, ya kno because there werent any dx11 around at that time so the problem is the achitecture of the GPU aaaand srsly so much for a game thats been the same with minor changes since 2007 ofc it would run on it, i think the one that doesnt know what he is talking about is you.

You Don't know what You are talking about. I'll tell You my personal experience: I had in my main PC a GeForce 9500gt (Wich is faster than both gt210 And hd5450) And When I tried To play COD ghosts on it (ghosts requires dx11) The game wouldn't even start, I used DXCPL To force The game To run, And it did...at 5 fps. Then I installed it on my second PC (with HD5450) And The game started without problems And ran 30+ fps at low 1024*768. In fact, The DX11 made posible To run a game Wich would have been impossible to run otherwise.

IF it requires dx11 this GPU will not be able to even reach 10fps so your arguement is invalid

Unless the game requires dx11....

Sorry to break your dreams but DX11 is useless in both those pathetic cards

r u fucking srs do you even IQ bruh?

Or...

Yes, dx 11 support for next gen game

yes, assassins creed 1

yes, directx 11 support

geforce 210 same price with hd 5450, but geforce 210 not support directx 11, hd 5450 support directx 11 for cheap, i like it

Who would drop $500 on monitors and then buy a $25 graphics card? All these SFF dells we have run dual DP. I was pretty sure all the newer (HD 2000 and up) iGPUs ran dual link DVI anyway which is capable of resolutions beyond 4k. Either way...if I had a system that couldn't support my monitors I dropped $500 on, my first choice isn't going to be a $25 card leftover from 5 years ago. There are plenty low end junk cards under $50 many times more powerful that aren't EOL.

Yeah, but again, even though some monitors have a display port, by far not all motherboards do. This is exactly where the good ol' 5450 comes in.

Sure they will. My machine at work actuality has a 2500 (no k or s) and runs 2 1600p monitors. Yes, display port but I've yet to find a 1600p monitor without a display port. As far as only a few fps, when you're at low framerates like cards this cheap produce, that's 10% or more. I'll say it again, it's a $25 garbage card. The only reason to consider it is if you have an old system and want an HD output for the absolute minimum price. I still had to upgrade the Core 2 Duo in an old system (gma 950) for it to even keep up with streaming a final 4 game with the 5450 "assisting" with decoding. Tried to make it as cheap as possible for a church youthgroup streaming machine and wound up forfeiting a good ol' e8400 because I tried to save $5.

First of all, you are probably talking about the later gen i3s. Second, there is one slight problem with igps.. They don't support higher than 1080p resolutions. At all! Unless you have a display port. My Sandy Bridge igp is only slightly more powerful than a 5450. We are talking a few frames literally. But 5450 will do 1440p. IGP will not!

I really do because for $5 more ($30) you could get a GT 610 which is more than twice as fast. I also snagged a GT 730 for a low power machine for only $40 that really blew away the 610 in the same system. Even at $25, it's worthless in anything but old systems with integrated graphics. The iGPU of an i3 beats it quite handily.

You don't know what you are talking about. It all depends on what your needs are. I love my HD 5450 - I can play Command and Conquer 3 @ 1440p with some settings on low, off or medium. I can also play Diablo 3 @ 800x600 with everything off. For such a low end card, such results are very respectable. For the price, it's a hell of a card. Amazing how it can play anything remotely modern at all.

WHY SAID NOPE?