Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CONFUSED ! FX5200 or Radeon9xxx !

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 6, 2005 9:08:35 PM

Hello ,

It's my first time visitng the forum but i hope I would be able to post here alot :) 

anyways I am about to buy a new PC ( in a day or two ) which consists of :
a PIV 3.2 Ghz 1 mb CACHE
ASUS P4P800 Deluxe, Intel i865PE chipset
512 Spectec DDR ( x2 256 ) not sure of the speed yet
80 GB HD with 8 MB cache
Sony CD-RW (52x-32x-52x)
An Old but good 19" DELL black monitor
SoundBlaster Live! 5.1 ( already owned )

Anyways I like to think of myself as a gamer , although I dont afford to buy GAMERS hardware ... I can't REDUCE/IMPROVE any of the above feature as they are a part of s special promotion here in my city , ( cairo , egypt ) the only thing that I can chose is the monitor and the Graphcis card ...

here comes my confusion !
i don't have lotsa money left .. and i mean i need a gfx card that is in the range of $70 - 90 and CAN run modern games ( HL2 / UT2004 / FarCry .. )

on my mind and on the market there's only the following cards that suits my budget :

ATi :

ATi Radeon 9000 PRO
ATi Radeon 9200 128
ATi Radeon 9250 128

Nvidia :
Geforce FX5200

after reading many many many THG and other articles ... I got more confused ..

the whole ATI list i mentioned above are DX8.1 cards .. that has similar clock/memory speeds .. although the older Radeon9000 is the fastest in the Above list ( ATi/Nvidia ) it's kinda old

on the other hand , the GeforceFX5200 ( not ultra ) might be the slowest card on this list but it's using DX9.0 and PS 2.0 which are mostly used in nowadays games

so I was thinking ..

If i got a Radeon 9000 PRO / 9200 for better speeds with less features should be better than better features and lower speeds right ?

Considering that I can upgrade the graphics card in A period of 2-3 months .. Should I go with an ATi Radeon 9200 or a 9000PRO or the Nvidia way ?

I currently OWn a P3 1.0ghz PC with a Geforce 2 MX 32SDR wich allowed me to play almost all games till Doom3/FarCry showed ... I even finished HL2 on it . so I believe in low-end cards .. really :p  besides I won't be turning the res over 800x600 or 1024x768 , nor touching FSAA .

what do you think ? please help .. as this would directly affect my purchasing ....
a b U Graphics card
April 6, 2005 10:34:24 PM

You basically answered you own question.
The 5200 is too slow to display DX9 features at deacent frame rates. So you are stuck with DX8.1 with this card.
If I remember correctly Doom will default to DX8.1 with this card any way. So buying it for its DX9 features is pointless.
So go for the ATI 9000 pro.

I aint signing nothing!!!
April 6, 2005 10:53:49 PM

Thanks alot , Yes I answered myself but my answer doesn't seem to convince me enough unless someone else is also convinced with what i am saying :) 

So I will go for the ATi Radeon9000 PRO for now :) 
April 6, 2005 10:53:50 PM

Thanks alot , Yes I answered myself but my answer doesn't seem to convince me enough unless someone else is also convinced with what i am saying :) 

So I will go for the ATi Radeon9000 PRO for now :) 
a b U Graphics card
April 6, 2005 11:21:11 PM

None of those cards are good for gaming. You have a nice system there, but all three video cards are going to bottleneck it big time. Any chance you can get a Radeon 9600 pro, Radeon 9600, Radeon 9550 128-bit, or GF4 Ti4200? All would be much better than those cards.

If you game, I'd highly recommend you lower that CPU a little bit to a 2.8-3.0GHz cpu, if it would save enough money to buy a Radeon 9600 pro. A P4 2.8GHz/Radeon 9600 pro is a much better gamer than a P4 3.2Ghz/FX5200, Radeon 9250, radeon 9000 Pro. Basically for gaming, don't skimp on the video card.

EDIT: I see you mentioned only choosing the video card and monitor. I guess if you must choose one of the three, the 9000 pro would be the one. But it's a shame with a 19" CRT, to not get a video card capable of gaming at 1024x768 resolution.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pauldh on 04/06/05 07:33 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2005 9:07:32 AM

Look, the cheapest DX9 card that can actually use DX9 without crippling your framrate to a slideshow is the Radeon 9550 (128-bit version, the 64-bit is significantly worse). If you can't afford that, consider a good performing DX8 card: The Ti4200 for example will offer simlar framerates to the 9600 Pro, but with reduced features (DX8.1 rather than 9).

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
April 12, 2005 5:40:31 PM

WEEEEEEEEEHA !

I just think that GOD LIKES me !!

After going for that Promotion PC i was going to GET ! I won some CASH ( someting Near $900 )

now here's my NEW PC configs :

AMD Athlon64 3000+ 754
Gigabyte Nforce3 ULTRA MB ( Sata/LAn/8 channel audio )
512 KingStone DDR400 RAM
>>> ASSUS GEFORCE 6600 - AGP 8X <<<
120 GB Sata HD Raid0/1
Sony CD-R 52x32x52x
User 19" ACER CRT !

now the only thing left is some Extra cooling stuff for over-clocking ! :p 
April 12, 2005 6:44:15 PM

Make sure to get the GeForce 6600GT (if possible) instead of the regular 6600.

--------------------------------------------
In just two days, tomorrow will be yesterday.
April 13, 2005 12:28:10 PM

Congratulations on your good fortune. If you can, see about getting another stick of RAM to give you a 1 Gb. I have a very similar setup and started with 512 MB. This resulted in the HDD being accessed frequently, even with the swap file and what not being modified from default.

And as the other poster said, go with the GT.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by BrandtP on 04/13/05 08:30 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 13, 2005 5:11:47 PM

Wow..how did you win $900? So what does this bring your entire spending limit too? About $1500? I dunno, I'm just guessing. But if it is about $1500, you could do a lot better than the system you just mentioned with the 64-bit processor..

<font color=blue>AthlonXP-M 2500+(12x200)</font color=blue>|<font color=green>Abit NF7-S</font color=green>|<font color=red>1GB Kingston DDR400</font color=red>|<font color=purple>NEC Accucync90 19"</font color=purple>|<font color=black>Sapphire 9600XT</font color=black>
April 13, 2005 10:48:57 PM

thanks alot guys ! ur really helpfull

but..

no it's not $1500 .. it's $900 IN TOTAL !
I can't afford to get 6600 GT .. it's about $90 more expensive
i've planned to get a 512 for now and upgrade next month to 1gb hopefully

there's only ONE STRANGE problem , first here's the detailed SPECS :

AMD Athlon 64 3000+ ( 2.0 GHZ ) (
Gigabyte K8-blabla-PRO ( Sound / Gigabit Lan / Sata >>>> AGP 8X <<<<<
MSI Geforce 6600 128 DDR3 >> AGP 8x <<
512 DDR2 Kingstone ( not sure of the model )
80GB Maxtor Sata HD
17" Brand New Hansol Monitor
the rest are plain regular

my only question is
I couldn't find a suitable PCI-E AMD motherboard .. all i found were Nforce 4 ( SLI ) [-peep-] .. which is $350 ALONE !!!

and the FUNNIEST THING ON EARTH is that THe Geforce6600 AGP8X IS ACTUALY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE PCI-E version ! STRANGE COUNTRY I LIVE IN !

but that's like the best i could get with exactly $827.50 !
hope it's good enough to play modern games ?
April 15, 2005 1:51:22 AM

^ bump !

will it be good enough for doom3 and the upcoming titles ? i only play at 1024x768 no AA or AF
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2005 3:06:55 AM

Current titles...more than likely.
Future titles. [/shrugs]

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2005 4:09:46 AM

SLI mobos are expensive. Cheapest A64 route is S754 as you have chosen. There are a few PCI-e S754 mobos, but not many to my knowledge. While not 100% accurate, I see S754 as AGP and S939 as AGP or PCI-e. GF6600 series are still a little cheaper in PCI-e here, but getting closer. They have a bridge chip on them that ads to the cost. The GF6800 series, AGP is cheaper.

How much is a Radeon 9800 pro 256-bit 128MB? It isn't up to 6600GT standards, but if priced the same as the GF6600, it would be the better buy. Not sure if the drops have reached you over there, but 256-bit R9800 pro's are now at the $150 marker here. In AGP, lowest priced 6600's are $135 and 6600GT's are $171.


Personally for a gaming rig, If it would allow me to step that GF6600 up to a GF6600GT, I'd want to drop that A64 3000+ to a 2800+ or Sempron 3100+ (both also OC well if you want that). Those CPU's are plenty fast considering you are on a budget, and the plain 6600 would be the bottle neck in most games. In my opinion a Sempron 3100+/6600GT > an A64 3000+ 6600 when it comes to games. get the right Sempron, and they can OC like mad too. Not sure if everyone would agree, but one things for sure don't skimp on the video card in a gaming rig. You want to blend a good cpu, good video card, and 512MB minimum.


<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
!