Which Video Card is better?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hello, I need to upgrade the video card on my computer.
However, since I am a student I don't have a whole lot of
cash. So, I researched some "budget" cards and came up
with the following:

1) ATI Radeon 9200
2) nVidia GeForce FX5200 (From MSI Corp.)

The above two cards are affordable for me, but I just can
not decide which is better. I have Windows XP
Professional, SP1, and DirectX 9.0. The card will be
used for maily games and a 3D modeling application.

Any Thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

Fred
4 answers Last reply
More about which video card better
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    >1) ATI Radeon 9200
    >2) nVidia GeForce FX5200 (From MSI Corp.)

    The two are actually about the same, only if you performed
    a benchmark or something would you notice any difference
    between the two statisticly.

    But I'd go with the Radeon as it features all this:

    Eight parallel rendering pipelines
    Four parallel geometry engines
    256-bit DDR memory interface
    AGP 8X support

    SMARTSHADERT 2.1
    Full support for Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable
    vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
    2.0 Vertex Shaders support vertex programs up to 65,280
    instructions with flow control
    2.0 Pixel Shaders support up to 16 textures per rendering
    pass

    New F-buffer technology supports pixel shader programs
    with unlimited instructions
    128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color
    formats

    Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
    Shadow volume rendering acceleration
    Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via
    extensions

    SMOOTHVISIONT 2.1
    2x/4x/6x full scene anti-aliasing modes
    Adaptive algorithm with programmable sample patterns
    2x/4x/8x/16x anisotropic filtering modes
    Adaptive algorithm with bi-linear (performance) and tri-
    linear (quality) options

    HYPER ZT III+
    3-level Hierarchical Z-Buffer with early Z test
    Lossless Z-Buffer compression (up to 24:1)
    Fast Z-Buffer Clear
    Z cache optimized for real-time shadow rendering

    TRUFORMT 2.0
    2nd generation N-Patch higher order surface support
    Discrete and continuous tessellation levels per polygon
    Displacement mapping

    VIDEOSHADERT
    Seamless integration of pixel shaders with video

    FULLSTREAMT video de-blocking technology
    Noise removal filtering for captured video
    MPEG-2 decoding with motion compensation, iDCT and color
    space conversion
    All-format DTV/HDTV decoding
    YPrPb component output*
    Adaptive de-interlacing and frame rate conversion
    Dual integrated display controllers
    Dual integrated 10-bit per channel 400 MHz DACs
    Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant and
    HDCP ready)

    Integrated TV Output support up to 1024x768 resolution
    Windows® Logo Program compliant

    **************************
    All that preceding would go good with any 3D editing
    application.
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1552184,00.asp

    "3D Price/Performance Shootout"

    It's a gaming comparison, rather than one for graphics applications.

    I believe that the Radeon 9200 is not a DirectX 9 part; rather, it's a DX
    8.1 card. (See www.ati.com.) That may not be important for most games at
    this time.

    If the MSI card is a vanilla FX 5200 (rather than a 5200 Ultra), it will
    have slower graphics processor and (I expect) memory clocks than the Ultra.

    You might do better with a Radeon 9600 family product. (www.newegg.com
    allows you to search video cards by chipset, so you'll find several makers
    of cards that use the 9600 GPU.) The non-Pro has a lower clock than the Pro,
    but some models are less than $100US. Avoid the SE version.

    HTH.

    Address altered. Replace nkbob with bobkn.

    "-----Fred-----" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:1394f01c41ab4$e4d00510$a001280a@phx.gbl...
    > Hello, I need to upgrade the video card on my computer.
    > However, since I am a student I don't have a whole lot of
    > cash. So, I researched some "budget" cards and came up
    > with the following:
    >
    > 1) ATI Radeon 9200
    > 2) nVidia GeForce FX5200 (From MSI Corp.)
    >
    > The above two cards are affordable for me, but I just can
    > not decide which is better. I have Windows XP
    > Professional, SP1, and DirectX 9.0. The card will be
    > used for maily games and a 3D modeling application.
    >
    > Any Thoughts?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    >
    > Fred
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    The specs that you listed (below) are for a Radeon 9800.

    http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9800/radeon9800pro/specs.html

    The 9200 is a lot less powerful:

    http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9200/radeon9200/specs.html

    (no 256-bit wide memory interface, no 8 pipelines, etc., no DX9, etc.) Even
    the 9600 lacks the 256 bit memory bus.

    "miffy900@hotmail.com" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
    message news:1832001c41abe$7eaa60a0$a401280a@phx.gbl...

    >1) ATI Radeon 9200
    >2) nVidia GeForce FX5200 (From MSI Corp.)

    The two are actually about the same, only if you performed
    a benchmark or something would you notice any difference
    between the two statisticly.

    But I'd go with the Radeon as it features all this:

    Eight parallel rendering pipelines
    Four parallel geometry engines
    256-bit DDR memory interface
    AGP 8X support

    SMARTSHADERT 2.1
    Full support for Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable
    vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
    2.0 Vertex Shaders support vertex programs up to 65,280
    instructions with flow control
    2.0 Pixel Shaders support up to 16 textures per rendering
    pass

    New F-buffer technology supports pixel shader programs
    with unlimited instructions
    128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color
    formats

    Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
    Shadow volume rendering acceleration
    Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via
    extensions

    SMOOTHVISIONT 2.1
    2x/4x/6x full scene anti-aliasing modes
    Adaptive algorithm with programmable sample patterns
    2x/4x/8x/16x anisotropic filtering modes
    Adaptive algorithm with bi-linear (performance) and tri-
    linear (quality) options

    HYPER ZT III+
    3-level Hierarchical Z-Buffer with early Z test
    Lossless Z-Buffer compression (up to 24:1)
    Fast Z-Buffer Clear
    Z cache optimized for real-time shadow rendering

    TRUFORMT 2.0
    2nd generation N-Patch higher order surface support
    Discrete and continuous tessellation levels per polygon
    Displacement mapping

    VIDEOSHADERT
    Seamless integration of pixel shaders with video

    FULLSTREAMT video de-blocking technology
    Noise removal filtering for captured video
    MPEG-2 decoding with motion compensation, iDCT and color
    space conversion
    All-format DTV/HDTV decoding
    YPrPb component output*
    Adaptive de-interlacing and frame rate conversion
    Dual integrated display controllers
    Dual integrated 10-bit per channel 400 MHz DACs
    Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant and
    HDCP ready)

    Integrated TV Output support up to 1024x768 resolution
    Windows® Logo Program compliant

    **************************
    All that preceding would go good with any 3D editing
    application.
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "-----Fred-----" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:1394f01c41ab4$e4d00510$a001280a@phx.gbl...
    > Hello, I need to upgrade the video card on my computer.
    > However, since I am a student I don't have a whole lot of
    > cash. So, I researched some "budget" cards and came up
    > with the following:
    >
    > 1) ATI Radeon 9200
    > 2) nVidia GeForce FX5200 (From MSI Corp.)
    >
    > The above two cards are affordable for me, but I just can
    > not decide which is better. I have Windows XP
    > Professional, SP1, and DirectX 9.0. The card will be
    > used for maily games and a 3D modeling application.
    >
    > Any Thoughts?
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    >
    > Fred

    Wait, wait and wait and you will find that cards like the Radeon 9600xt
    will be affordable. Basically the others are junk
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Windows XP