The Graphics Cards Articles
- TUL PowerColor X700 Pro 256
- Movie Theater Video for the Masses
- MSI RX800PRO-TD256: Little Value Add, Lots of Software
- JVC Everio GZ-MC200: An Hour of DVD with No Cassette!
- Gigabyte's 3D1: Are Two Engines Better Than One?
- VGA Charts V: PCI Express Graphics Cards
- R480 and R430: ATI's Fall PCIe Update
- Gigabyte's GV-N68T256DH Graphics Card: Give the Heatsink Its Mod Due
- DVRack: Video Recording without the Tape
- The TFT Connection: Do NVIDIA and ATi Deliver?
Forum
- anyone remember Itanium?
- Is there a guide to upgrading options?
- After quiet cooling for 2 x Opteron 270's
- Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R :Documenting my issues with audio(stutter)...
- 2gb modules?
- Budget Pc - Could you help me out?
- Looking to Build a MicroATX "Cube" PC
- Gaming System Under $450.00
- Performance Workstation Advice Needed
12:03 PM - February 8, 2005 by
Lars Weinand
Source: Tom's Hardware US – Keywords: nvidia, geforce, 6200, turbocache
Topics: Build Your Own, INTEL, NVIDIA
Syndication:
Source: Tom's Hardware US – Keywords: nvidia, geforce, 6200, turbocache
Topics: Build Your Own, INTEL, NVIDIA
Syndication:
Table of Contents:
Farcry Performance Comparison

None of the cards tested here is fast enough to run FarCry at the highest quality setting. Switching to the medium quality settings, we can see that the GeForce 6200 can once again shine. The overall situation only improves when we move to the lowest quality preset. However, the greatly reduced image quality dilutes the gaming experience.
Again, only the 32 MB variant of the TurboCache cards is even worth a second look, as the 16 MB version performs even worse than Intel's integrated GMA900. The 64 MB model is again slower than the 32 MB card.
- Previous page Farcry
- Next page Half-Life 2