It also says 'discontinued' in the description on Cnet.com when I looked it up. Besides this, whether or not something has a 1 year, a 3 year or a 5 year warranty does not make it crap or good quality. The Xbox 360 comes with a 3 year warranty. It also didn't stop you from recomending the cheapest motherboard and graphics card you could find. 

those 80mm fans aren't going to kill anyone, especially if they are attached to the motherboard fan controls. The cases are listed as having 120mm fans as well btw.

The assertion that an HD5750 can't take advantage of 1GB is false. There are several games. and these are increasing with time where 1GB shows a clear advantage over 512MB.

The assertion that the HD 5750 cannot take advantage of Direct X 11 is also false. Compute shaders are more efficient at running advanced shader programs. These shaders will also run on the HD 4850 but at higher computational cost. The 4850 will have to emulate DX11 whereas the 5750 will have native support. Direct X 11 games run faster on Direct X 11 hardware.

What are the advantages of the card I listed?

1. Fan control, the one you listed just goes one speed. (You mentioned noise)

2. Card quality.

3. Lower power consumption, lower (system) noise.

4. Supports advanced features like Direct X 11

5. Has twice as much ram, so therefore is future proofed.

6. Overclocks extremely well if someone so chose.

I've never seen any reviews express that sentiment. The 4850 (and 5750, GTS250) is a good card and has been since launch. It makes most games playable (>30fps) on 1600x1200, which is an above-average resolution for a gamer looking at the Steam survey, reviews, and a few other places. The first DX11 games are really unoptimised and hardware-demanding (even in DX10 mode); the design of DX11 is that it will bring better graphics for similar performance to DX10, once games are designed with it from scratch rather than it being bolted on. Look at the huge drops for DX10 performance when it was first released; now those same cards perform similarly under DX10 and DX9 games.

I've seen people and reviews say the 5670 isn't good enough to do DX11 at playable framerates.

However if the 4850 is $100 and the 5750 is $130 as they are then the 4850 is a better choice.

Mobos and graphics cards are not nearly as manufacturer-dependant as power supplies. The best PSU manufacturers will place a 5-year warranty on their PSUs because they know they're making a quality product. The worst will only provide a one-year death sentence warranty. This is a well-documented fact.

Graphics cards, on the other hand, are built to manufacturer (and that means ATI and NVidia's) specs. The only difference is the cooling unit and the number of video-out ports.

I don't recommend cheap cases with multiple 80mm fans because cheap 80mm fans are WAY more likely to be noisy than cheap 120mm fans. It's not devastating, but it can make a lot of difference.

As for the 5750: A quick Google search led me to some benchmarks that rate it at 20.6 average FPS on Stalker: Call of Pripyat at 1680x1050 w/4x AA and an average of 32.7 FPS on DIRT 2 at 1680x1050 with no AA (turning on AA, it's assumed, would drop it from "just playable" into unplayable framerates.) That's two out of the three currently released DirectX 11 games out there. While it's true that DX11 games probably won't be fully optimized for the standard for another year or more, that's all the more reason to just buy DX10 now and upgrade later down the line.

As for the rest of your points...

RAM: Even a 256-bit card like the 4850 does not have enough bandwidth to fully access 1 GB of GDDR3 memory most of the time. The 5750 is only a 128-bit card, but its GDDR5 memory means that it can better utilize that extra 512. (Not that you can find a 512MB 5750 anymore in the first place) Either way, the extra 512 doesn't matter for a 4850.

Fan Noise: This chart shows that there's no significant difference in noise between any of ATI's video cards (scroll down the page a bit).

Power consumption: Unless you have special needs, this doesn't matter.

Overclocking: Both do so extremely well. You might be able to get a little more juice out of the 5750 with stock cooling, though.

That's not to say that the 5750 is a bad card, of course. In fact, it's a very good one for 1680x1050 and lower resolutions. It just doesn't capture the price:performance "sweet spot" nearly as well as the 4850 does.

Graphics cards quality do definately depend on how they are made. They are hot products and it really does make a difference in terms of fan noise because typically a GPU fan on a low end card will use a two wire single speed fan. The board I gave as an example was a referrence boardwhich means it was manufactured by Saphire and then had another companies label slapped on it.

You can see significant differences in quality between motherboards too. The number of DOA or DSA (dead soon after) motherboards are significantly higher. Just read the Newegg reviews for boards which have low ratings. ECS is in this group.

That PSU+Case example had 5 stars on Newegg. If there was a reliability problem it would have been rated down to 4-3 stars as people generally do come back to the same review after the fact to report their problems. Since it has excellent reviews over a couple of years its pretty safe to say its not a bad design. The PSU you gave as an example a 350W PSU with no feedback was a risk, more so than the PSU+Case example. He can take out the 80mm fans if he doesn't like them. He does have to have a screw-driver to build the computer in the first place. That would leave two 120mm fans which is perfectly fine.

He will not be using the card above 1440 by 900 resolution. Since the monitor he chose was this resolution. The HD 5750 would have to push 27% fewer pixels at that resolution which does make a significant difference and would allow both games which are more efficient under the DX11 path and games which offer more I.Q. to run on the DX11 path.

As for RAM. The Xbox 360 has no trouble using 512MB of RAM with 25GB/S memory bandwidth, so I see no reason why this card couldn't use 1GB of RAM, especially with 3* the memory bandwidth. Since 1GB of ram is defaulting as the typical enthusiast ram quantity, I wouldn't suggest anyone get anything less. In addition he can get the card for $135 from saphire with a different cooler design. Thats only a $30 difference in that case.

Do not rely upon Newegg reviews - or any other user-aggregate reviews, for that matter - for accurate reports of failure rates. The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." For what it's worth, though: Most ECS mobos have a 4-egg or higher rating on Newegg.

If your GPU fan makes a lot of noise, then it's probably the result of poor cabling/airflow in your case. Even the cheapest GPU fans should not produce enough noise to be heard over your CPU/case/PSU fans, unless you're specifically building a cool'n'quiet system. Check out that chart that I linked in my last post for more info.

Also, every PC power supply buying guide in existence will tell you to avoid purchasing cheap PSUs. The PSU is the one component in your PC that can severely damage, or even nuke entirely, every single other component in the box. In addition, cheap PSUs usually do not provide the power that they are rated to provide, are likely horribly inefficient, and may cause long boot times, memory errors, or random shutdowns. This is a well-documented fact and I don't know why you're arguing otherwise.

If the OP is really concerned about the PSU that I recommended, I could easily recommend one at a higher wattage that's not too much more money. However, he shouldn't be: an entire system sporting a Radeon 4850, running at full 3D load, only draws 231 watts of power. A quality 350W PSU can handle that with one arm (cable?) tied behind its back.

Putting aside for the moment that you don't cite a source for this claim: Why, exactly, does the OP need to push 27% fewer pixels, especially given that he's on a tight budget and isn't running at a GPU-intensive resolution?

As for the RAM issue: After scouring Google, I finally came across some benchmarks comparing a 512mb vs 1gb Radeon 4850. This chart shows a performance gain of less than 1 FPS for that extra 512 MB on Mass Effect. This chart shows about a 1-2 FPS gain, on average, for Call of Duty 4. And finally, again, only about 1-2 FPS on Frontlines: Fuel of War. The only game that shows any significant difference (about 4-5 FPS) is Crysis, and that's the exception rather than the rule due to the unique way that the engine is programmed (if you need any more proof that this is unusual, the 1 GB 4850 actually outperforms the 512mb 4870 - which is a more powerful card overall - at most resolutions in Crysis.) So if you want to pay extra money for a 1 FPS gain on most games, then go ahead, but in this thread I'm in the business of advising people to not waste their money.

In conclusion: Either please start citing some sources or take your misinformed opinions elsewhere.

The user reviews for the ECS motherboards have a spike in the one or two egg range compared to other better brands. Reading through user reviews there are considerably higher proportion of DOA motherboards compared to brands like Gigabyte and it was stated several times that their tech support sucks. Newegg is a more savvy userbase than say Amazon.com, so I do put some trust in the user review scores to steer me away from obviously bad products. ECS are not bad, but they aren't amazing either. I would never suggest for a less experienced user to get anything less than a top quality brand motherboard because it involves significant hassle to trouble shoot a PC which doesn't start, and significant stress as well.

Do you really need me to provide you with a graph to show noise vs load? I thought something like that was obvious. If a GPU doesn't have a fan controller then it has to spin at terminal velocity whilst the other components are idle. Its the idle noise, not the noise at load which concerned me here.

Regarding the power supply, your own links warn against a PSU like the Seasonic. Since information about it is scarce I will have to assume that its got two 12v rails as dictated by specifications. Since one rail is primarily dedicated to the CPU and the other is primarily dedicated towards the GPU subsystem and the combined 12v load is 324 one can assume that 160W max is available to the GPU componentry. You would run the 12V rail supplying the GPU at over 70% load for typical use? The GPU itself could exceed its typical design power in certain situations and ATI even suggests a 450W PSU.

As for RAM, its becoming increasingly difficult to even find a graphics card in the mid range which has less than 1GB of ram. I go from experience here. When there was 128MB ram standard, people said no you don't need 256mb, don't pay extra. They were proved wrong, the 256MB cards had much longer legs than the 128MB cards. When there was 256MB ram standard people said no you don't need 512MB of ram, don't pay extra. They were proved wrong once again. But now you're saying 1GB is standard now, but don't pay extra for it, get an EOL 512MB card. The benchmarks at the time showed little difference, but given a couple more years and they showed up with significant differences. Are you assuming that hes going to be replacing the system internals within a couple of years?

I love this thread, it is currently my favorite on VGChartz. I just cant wait to be able to build my PC an share my experience

As I've already made my position clear on your sources (or lack thereof), I'll respond to the only thing that you linked and repeat my link demonstrating the actual wattage that a full system sporting a Radeon 4850 consumes at full 3D load. Graphics card manufacturers notoriously overinflate the PSU wattages needed to run their cards, mostly because of the aforementioned cheap inefficient PSUs that people who don't know any better buy for their home-built systems. Here's an anecdote: I recently installed a Radeon HD 4350 in my girlfriend's computer and ATI's recommended PSU wattage for that was 350W. Which, as anyone who knows anything about the 4350 knows, is laughably high. I think her PC runs a 250W PSU or something piddly like that.

Otherwise, keep in mind that that 230 watts at full 3D load was for the entire system. You could easily balance your system on a two-rail 350W PSU by dedicating one rail to the GPU and the other to the rest of the system. And that's if it's two rails in the first place - many quality PSUs, including the Corsair that I have in my home system, feature just a single rail.

EDIT: I just checked again, and that 230W figure was actually after they overclocked the card. The actual wattage at stock, for the entire system at full 3D load, was just 202W. Even more proof that a 350W PSU could handle that system.

The source: http://www.overclock.net/ati/594302-ati-power-consumption-graphs.html

Collated from Xbitlabs.com and GPUreview.com

Orange represents Furmark, red represents typical game power. HD 4850 = 120W max, HD 5750 = 85W max.

As for the PSU, then with further research I revise my reccomendation to an Antec Sonata 3 with an Earthwatts 500W PSU and 2 6 pin PCI-E cards. $110 which IIRC is the same price as the two components you suggested seperately. It has a 12cm fan with a variable speed control.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129024

Keeping a PSU under 30% typical load during idle can help extend its life. The closer its run to full capacity the lower the expected lifespan and the more noise you can expect from it. It also gives the option of running up to an HD 5870 class card, theres no point in a computer which you cannot upgrade without ripping it apart. I wasn't saying that it wouldn't run, I was saying that it may not be such a good long term prospect.

This is actually a decent pick for someone on a budget. An attractive, gimmick-free case plus a PSU with a three-year warranty. I don't know about Earthwatts, but at least it's not a cheap-o one-year-warrantied death machine.