Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Hurm... from GF3Ti200 to 4200 or 5600?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 7, 2003 3:29:32 PM

I'm upgrading my wife's system (well, upgrading mine and cascading the MB to hers so we both have A7N8X deluxes and decent Athlon systems, 1700-2500 or so), which will help out some of her frame rate problems (she's running a PII Celeron 300 OC to 450, woot-from-ages-past... modern games play like a traveling adventure slideshow). Unfortunately, her box still has a GF2MX (mine has a GF3Ti200, so neither card is blazing, but that's OK).

So I'm looking at a minor vid card upgrade for me and cascade the GF3Ti200 into her box. I'd like to stay NVidia because it simplifies these cascading upgrades (for example, no driver changes when moving cards from machine to machine) and because I like NVidia's Linux support quite a bit... (kinda too bad, because while I love NVidia's products, they are not faring so well these days...).

I'd like to get a midrange upgrade in the next month or so and then maybe a higher upgrade in about 6 months... the 6-month upgrade will likely be an NV35, but I'm torn on the immediate decision.

Basically, it's between the Ti4200 or wait a few weeks for the 5600. What I guess I'm trying to figure out is why someone would buy the 5600... I'm all for new technology, but the 4200 is winning in several benchmarks (and will likely be cheaper). As far as I can tell all the 5600 brings to the table is a few more features (well, dx9 capabilities) at the cost of severe texture-fill limitations. Do folks think there will be enough games out in the next two years that use dx9 that the 5600 is a compelling choice over the 4200?

Jes' curious-->Stitch

More about : hurm gf3ti200 4200 5600

April 7, 2003 9:41:32 PM

I would go for a 5600 simply because it supports DX9..
Ti4200 beats 5600 in some tests..but fortunately 5600 does not lose too much..
since DX9 is out now..I guess there will be some new games coming soon.. (or I hope?)
also Ti4200 is a little old now, therefore I suggest 5600 since you don't want an ATI card, otherwise, Radeon9500 Pro would be a better idea, but anyway, hope you will get your decision between 4200 and 5600 soon, good luck~
April 8, 2003 1:33:08 AM

You sir have done your homework and researched properly.

No, don't even consider the 5600, this, in my opinion, should not be purchased by any sane buyer. It sucks, it plain SUCKS. It loses to an old generation easily, it has no current full driver support, it is not even guaranteed longevity support.

Do NOT buy it. Buy a Ti4200, buy a 9500PRO, but DO NOT step into this territory cuz of DX9. DX9 ain't out in a while, and no one can be sure yet of just how much DX9 performance on NV30s will be, because so far it has been abysmal. God knows a Ti4200 will beat it in DirectX9.

Hope you've gotten a bit of tips here, because I mean it, I will flame anyone who buys the 5600, it simply is the biggest disappointment, even far more than the 5800 Ultra. I don't understand why nVidia screwed their opportunity at mainstream DX9, but this one has truly stepped over my limits. It sucks, period.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
Related resources
April 8, 2003 2:16:39 AM

Buy a Radeon 9500 Pro. All FX cards suck. And GeForce3 Ti200 to GeForce4 Ti4200 upgrade is not a very good option, since both are DX8 cards

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
April 8, 2003 2:49:42 AM

Still, it is better than the FX5600 Ultra IMO, (hopefully the guy was talking about the Ultra in his post, because if he meant the other 5600 normal, I will pray for better days) and it still is twice better in usual performance. And god knows really just how good DX9 is on these FX cards. We've seen how bad the FX5800 is in there.
If he really wants to avoid messy reinstalls, I'm afraid I HAVE to recommend the Ti4200, even though I just would never get it for such reasons. Otherwise, a 9500PRO is an excellent future-proof choice for industry standard gaming.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 8, 2003 5:50:45 AM

my god a 9500pro is 280 CANADIAN!!


thats like, 210 U.S.

ffs, and its almost as fast as a 9700 ! blah, what can i say?

blah.. siggys suck
April 8, 2003 6:51:31 AM

It looks like you don't have a budget in mind because the price difference between Ti4200 and FX5600 is not that small. Yeah may be ATi card is superior than nVidia card but you already mention you like nVidia then there is no need to force you to change your mind, isn't it? :)  Since you are considering a major upgrade later on, I would say get a cheap but decent Ti4200 while you are waiting for NV35 and if NV35 is a true performer then you can get one and pass to your Ti4200 to your wife's machine or sell it. DirectX 9.0 is not a must now and in some benchmark DX8.1 even outperforms DX9.
But I must remind you most of the time when we change hardware especially graphic card, it's always a good thing to reinstall the driver, just in case any driver issue which may arise. But not a must again I must say.

You never know how stupid you are until you have done something stupid enough for you to realize it.
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=22996" target="_new">My System Rig</A>
April 8, 2003 12:34:39 PM

lol..sure I'm talking about 5600Ultra..
the 5600 is crappy, I know that
April 8, 2003 7:59:50 PM

I don't think it's as clear as all that.

The 5600 isn't a performance king, but I certainly wouldn't discount it so quickly, before it's even available.

It's framerates are at least comperable to the GF4 Ti4200, although some benchmarked games seem to show anomalies.

Turn on FSAA and anistropic filtering, and it seems to do very well.

It also seems to kick into high gear when used with software that makes use of pixel and vertex shaders. i.e. in 3dmark2003, it did very well in the "battle for proxycon", within a few FPS of the radeon 9500 PRO. So you have to consider how much time you plan to spend on Doom3 when it arrives...

Now don't get me wrong: I'm a great proponent of the 9500 PRO in this market segment. But Ati's linux driver's just aren't there yet, and I think everyone knows you can't go wrong with the Ti4200.

I just think you might want to wait and see if Nvidia can optimize the drivers for the 5600 cards by the time they make it to the market.

If you're not in a huge hurry, one month of waiting might not hurt. The Ti4200 will only get cheaper. :) 
April 8, 2003 8:19:38 PM

So you're telling me I should go for the 5600 just because in the 3dMark2003 test it finally egdes the 9500PRO, but DOES NOT beat it, AND to spend the same amount just because I can't handle a simple driver reinstallation?

Trust me, the card sucks, it won't improve, nVidia has given up the NV30-31 and might stay with NV34 in mass. Unless they can impress me, which I doubt, the 5600 Ultra, is the worst card ever conceived, even in AA and Aniso it gets raped by the 9500PRO.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
!