FX 5200

[dwadrian]

Before using nvidia fx5200 128MB im using Geforce4 mx 440 64MB.What confuse me is i try using benchmark on both of this card the result is that Mx 440 is running 310fps but the fx5200 is only running 181fps.While playing 3D games i can feel that fx5200 is slower than mx440.I had already download the lastst driver from nvidia homepage.Can anyone one pls tell me why ?

 

[shadus]

Because the 5200FX is a piece of sh!t.

Not that the MX440 is much better, but the 5200fx is trash in the most extreme sense of the word. It is *NOT* a gaming card. You would have been much better off picking up a TI-4200 or a TI-4800SE Gf4.

Make sure you get the detonator fx drivers for the card and other than that there's not much you can do, get one of the many tuner apps and perhaps try to overclock it a bit, but all in all, I'd suggest sending it back and getting a TI4200/TI4800SE.

If you are dead set on a FX chipset, then go up to the 5600FX Ultra. It actually performs adaquately well.

Shadus

 

[cleeve]

Ditto.

If you want a cheap card that doesn't suck, go Ti4200.

------------------
Radeon 9500 w/256 bit memory bus @ 367/310
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3439

 

[selfbuilt]

Do you have AA and AF turned on? They may be by default with the drivers ... if so, that would greatly reduce your benchmark scores. Otherwise, I would expect a non-ultra 5200 to perform roughly on par with a GF4 440MX without AA/AF (depending on memory configurations on the two cards - it could actually be slower!). I'm afraid I have to agree with the above posters ... it really isn't a very good card for the price.



Where does good judgement come from? Experience. Where does experience come from? Bad judgement.

 

[dwadrian]

I agree thanks all.........