ive warned SOO MANY PEOPLE TO NOT BUY the 5200 regular or Ultra. it was a card that should have never been released, and if someone wanted to pay the legal fees they could probably sue nVidia for false advertising because this product is based on lies
Hmm rather not impressive score.
My g3ti200 at AXP 1700+ and 512MB@133Mhz gets 832 points.
But anyway FX5200 is rather aimed at people who use their computers for web surfing, office work, programming and play games rather occasionally.
But a GeForce2 MX or a Riva TNT2 can get by on most of the things that you mentioned in your list, and a GeForce2 GTS could probably tackle all of those tasks decently. For people in that caliber, a decent more modern Radeon 9100 can be found to suit them more than enough, or if they want to pay a few extra bucks in the budget category, the Ti4200 is an excellent buy, but only worth it for those folks who plan to do some gaming.
EDIT: But for this guy he definitely needs a faster card to increase his framereate. In fact if he is on a tight budget, the Radeon 9100 & The GeForce 4 Ti4200 are exceelnt choices, (especially the Ti4200)
My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by UFO_WARVIPER on 10/17/03 12:39 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
P4 2.8c + FX5900 Ultra = just over 6000 without overclocking. I've had it overclocked as high as 6800 but I couldn't actually play any games for more than 5 mins as it kept crashing as I have no elaborate cooling and it's getting hot here in Sydney
You guy's crack me up. Dont think I dont know what Nvidia's done as far as app detection, shader replacement, and clip planes in 3DMark....but ATi has pulled off some cheats in that benchmark that are pretty unscrupulous also. Some were speculated, but never proven. I trust either company about as far as I can throw them.