Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

very Budget card choice

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 2, 2003 7:58:30 PM

for only £50 GBP which would make the most sense... (dont laugh, the friend who asked me is seriously just wanting a basic card that will run Dx7/8 games & std apps)

64mb version of MX440-8x, FX5200, 9000, 9200, 9200SE... any point in 128mb ?? (has a Kyro2 4500 card so any is an improvement...)

NB: Had a look at last THG comparisions from july, the 5200 is mostly faster than the 8500/9000/9100/9200/9200se series... hmmm

Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...

More about : budget card choice

December 2, 2003 8:04:59 PM

Stay away from the MX440 (no pixel shaders), the 5200 & 9200SE (horrible performance).
The 5200 looks good in some benchmarks, but it's pixel shader performance sucks REALLY badly. In upcoming games it will be all but unusable.

The 9000 PRO is a great cheap card.

If you can afford it, get a Geforce4 Ti 4200 though. That's an excellent budget card. Or a 9600SE if you can find one.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>
December 2, 2003 8:24:59 PM

yeah ti4200, i believe you can get one for 69. if thats not too much of a strecth.

<A HREF="http://www.cameronwilliamson.com" target="_new">-={Apostalic Alcoholic.}=-</A>
Related resources
December 2, 2003 8:26:44 PM

No good deals on a Ti4200 where I have been lookin... 9600se was my suggestion 2 him but have U ever tried to explain the difference between gfx cards to a
non-techie person (i will have to...)

Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...
December 2, 2003 8:59:51 PM

128 MB VRAM is completely useless with these cards.

Recommended cards for you:- (listed better to worse)

GeForce4 Ti4200 64 MB (highly recommended)
Radeon 8500LE 64 MB/Radeon 9100
Radeon 9000 PRO
Radeon 9200 (NOT THE "SE" model)
Radeon 9000 (non-PRO)

Cards you should avoid:

GeForce4 MX series
GeForce FX5200
Radeon 9200SE

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
December 10, 2003 11:40:45 AM

Got a Ti4200 8x for £74 GBP, fone a frankenstien & built a hodgepodge system (Duron 1.2, 40GB HDD K7S5A with onboard LAN, 128mb SDRAM, XP Pro (WinME kept throwing up errors & wouldnt install right)

But now, passes PCmark 2002 fine but out of 6 runs has only completed 3dmark2001se twice (around 6000marks, the rest the system will reboot itself) think it might be the PSU so am swapping out the kyro2 of the destination PC & putting the card into its home early

notions ???



Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...
December 10, 2003 1:01:33 PM

sorry ppl but i have to disagree here
yes the ATI radon are good cards but i for the sake of my little brother, got a leadtek(winfast) 5200FX 128mb and 128 bits, at the moment all the games are running at max resolution at 1600x1400 and no problem at all!!!

it costed $HK650 which is £50
i don't really see the point to get a high end display card!



I love my pc
but my pc hates me...
December 10, 2003 1:53:36 PM

The 5200FX working well in your brothers case does not mean that other cards in the same price range are inferior. Nor does the 5200 working well in some games mean that it will in all of them.

The cheaper Ti4200 *will* be faster than the 5200, in pretty much every situation. The only drawback being no DirectX 9 shaders, but that doesn't matter because the 5200 is too slow in DX9 to use those shader instructions anyway.

The 9600SE will also be faster than the 5200 in pretty much every situation. DirectX 9 especially.

If all three are the same price, what's the incentive to choose the slowest one, even if it works OK for your current needs? Newer, more demanding games keep coming out and sooner or later you'll wish you got the best card available in the price range.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>
December 10, 2003 2:01:17 PM

Do you recommend a Geforce FX 5600xt 128mb? I currently have a Radeon 8500LE 128mb, but I can't get it working properly. It keeps freezing up my pc. I've tried several driver versions, but no progress. I even formatted my pc. So I picked up a Geforce FX 5600xt 128mb, it's working great. Is Geforce FX 5600xt 128mb a good reliable card? Do you recommend a Geforce Ti4200 128mb or 64mb whatever it is now, over the Geforce FX 5600xt 128mb ultra/760?
December 10, 2003 2:02:33 PM

What games does he play??

Damn Rambus.
December 10, 2003 2:08:35 PM

My TI4200 runs frames around his FX5200.
December 10, 2003 2:11:08 PM

Clamchowder, you probably just have a bad card there, plain and simple. Everybody makes a bad board that slips through quality control now and again, I understand your feelings but I don't think you should take that as proof that one particular manufacturer sucks.

Having said that, the 5600 is an OK card but is often outperformed by the lowly (and cheap) Geforce4 Ti4200, the 5600's only advantage being DirectX 9 compatibility.

If you've got a 5600 for cheap it's not the end of the world, but once again you'd be better served by a cheaper Ti4200. In the same price range, the 9600 PRO is a much better card than the 5600, and for a few bucks more so is the GeforceFX 5700 and 5900.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>
December 10, 2003 2:28:08 PM

What sucks about ATI is that they don't support the 8500LE anymore. Make it then abandone it. I never have problem with this card until recently.
Thanks for your knowledge Cleeve.
December 10, 2003 6:03:48 PM

Geforce Ti4200. recently upgraded my firends PC and it runs splinter cell and Max Payne 2 nicely.

Shuttle XPC SN45G
Athlon XP 3200+
nForce2 Ultra 400
Corsair 512mb ddr400
Radeon 9600 Pro
WD 160GB HDD
Toshiba DVD-RW
December 10, 2003 8:01:40 PM

i dont beleive a fx5200 can run in 1600x1200 in newest game.
HALO IN 1600x1200 with a fx5200 hahahahahahahaha . WHAT A JOKE.

My own beast: Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb) , Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/370) , 512mb ddr400. SO MUCH faster than my last computer (pIII 550......)
December 10, 2003 8:07:03 PM

Wahey, I think it is screwed card... installed fine in the second system, dxdiag is fine, but try to run 3dmark2001se & it will A:hang the system & B: change the monitor light from green to orange (ie seems like standby) no powersave or screensaver enabled on the system (i even downclocked the memory & core a bit (wit riva tuner latest revision) to see if it was just running a bit too hot)

unless there is an issue with SiS 735chipset (and the 2 diff K7S5A board revisions that it has been tried with) I can RMA it by monday (got a NF2 ultra board arriving I will try it with this weekend hopefully)

Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...
December 10, 2003 8:57:31 PM

You friend doesn't sound very demanding. If a Ti4200 is too expensive then a used Geforce 3 Ti500 might fit the bill.

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 10, 2003 9:57:14 PM

Cleeve covered most of it, again of course! :wink:

Do you have a DX9 card yourself, if so don't explain to him, show him with <A HREF="http://www.google.ca/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://www.daio..." target="_new">rthdribl</A>, which is very impressive. Say 'so you won't be able to see THIS osrt of stuff on those DX8 cards'. :wink:

The R9100 is another option, but lesser than the GF4ti and R9600SE. It's usually better than the R9000Pro R9200Pro but even then it depends on the game there's some flip-floping as to champ nowadays. IF he does want one those two cards (especially if the R9100 isn't avail.) try and get a 'pro' model.

The thing to eplain is that there are some nice effects that can be added at no penalty and even PS2.0 code can do more efficiently some effects that slow down cards using DX8.1 and lower.

But go with whichever fits his budget best. The GF4ti is a great choice and the R9600SE is a good back-up choice IMO.

Best to find out the games he's planning on playing, but definitely stay away from the MX (alot of newer games don't offer support for the GF4 MX [meaning it will probably play, just not like the supported cards due to it's lack of features]).


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
a b U Graphics card
December 10, 2003 10:18:49 PM

GF FX 5600XT has 64 bit memory. It's the lowest of the FX5600 line, and gets outperformed by an FX5200U in most situations, and even by an R9000pro in many situations. That 64 bit memory really hurts them.

<A HREF="http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/nv38-36.html/n..." target="_new">This Digit Life Review</A> shows that the FX5600XT does well in the older games but is outperformed by the R9600SE in newer games (including HALO).

But for older games it's a pretty good choice, but gets beat by the R9000P and R9100 in most of those situations, and totally dominated by the GF4ti. The GF4ti would be a better choice since true DX9 is still a weak point of the FX5600XT and not a worthy reason for getting it (even the FX5200U is a better performer in DX8 and DX9).


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
December 10, 2003 10:56:37 PM

Thanks for the information. I will return the Gainward fx5600xt and get a better one. Either a geforce Ti4200 or R9600. Do you recommend staying away from the SE, LE craps from Radeon?
a b U Graphics card
December 10, 2003 11:16:30 PM

Yeah if you can afford it always stay away from any crippled memory. There is only one Radeon SE that is a good buy, and it's such a rarity as to not recommend it for fear of people buying the 90+% of the others out there).

The GF4ti(s), the R9600non-pro, and the FX5700 non ultra are all in about the same league. The R9600 has a bit of an advanatge in newer games, but the FX5700non-ultra definitely beats the FX5600 non-ultra thanks to it's 3 vertex engines (instead of the 5600's 2). The main thing will be price. the R9600 and FX5700 would be better choices IMO simply because of their attributes that compliment newer games.

Of course a PRO and ULTRA version would be nicer still, but money has to be considered of course.

That link to Digit-Life should help explain the differences a bit. Also check their video section they have a bunch of benchies, especially that 80 card test (top of video card section) GW posted this week.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil: 

<b>-NEW PIC IN THGC ALBUM-</b>
!