FX5200 better than gforce 4?

[Andrew]

NFSU is NOT a DX9 game. I can run this game with ALL graphic option on my
radeon8500le, which is dx8 card. There are no dx9 games released yet, might
have to wait untill doom3 or hl2 comes out.

There are no exclusively DX9 games yet, but there are certainly games
that utilise DX9 features. Doom 3 will use OpenGL BTW.

 

[Tim W.]

There are no exclusively DX9 games yet, but there are certainly games
that utilise DX9 features. Doom 3 will use OpenGL BTW.

If you don't have DX9, Need For Speed will not run at all.

Enjoy,

Tim Wisner www.wisner.us

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger)

 

[Tim W.]

Read the benchmark websites.... 20 FPS.. in a bit modern DX8 game.
Battlefields 1942 with mods over it.. be happy if you get 20 FPS.

I don't have to read a benchmark website, I just have to play a game
with my system and have actual first hand experience. Damn, this
reminds me of people with no kids giving parenting advice...

And that game aint DX9, just DX8. As games will require more and wish
to use more "graphic power" the FX5200 will end up to be a picture
show.

Try running NFSU without DX9. Oops.

That is simple seen from months before head!

I'm not saying that an FX5200 card is a great gaming card, I'm saying
that in my direct experience it is very usable and a if you have a
very tight budget, you can't really do better for $60.


Enjoy,

TLW

 

[Asestar]

NfsU do not require any DX9 hardware support! I ran nfsU on GeForce2 with ok
speed. However it does use dx8 features, i guess.

If you don't have DX9, Need For Speed will not run at all.

Enjoy,

Tim Wisner www.wisner.us

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the

argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

 

[J. Clarke]

I don't have to read a benchmark website, I just have to play a game
with my system and have actual first hand experience. Damn, this
reminds me of people with no kids giving parenting advice...


Try running NFSU without DX9. Oops.


I'm not saying that an FX5200 card is a great gaming card, I'm saying
that in my direct experience it is very usable and a if you have a
very tight budget, you can't really do better for $60.

There is a difference between needing DirectX 9 and needing a board that
provides acceleration of features unique to DirectX 9. Generally when
someone says that a game is "DirectX 8" he's not talking about it checking
the implementation level and giving an error message if it finds a number
below 9, he's talking about requiring that hardware acceleration of
features unique to DirectX 9 be present. I realize it's sloppy wording,
but the whole DirectX marketing thrust has been to generate as much FUD as
possible in the hopes of getting everybody to upgrade everything.

 

[GTX_SlotCar]

This is a little pointless since the original post stated GF3 and
specifically not MX, but anyway....
Just to clear this up a bit, and I'm by no means a DX expert, we need to
know the differences between the DX versions and how DX is used.
When a game is programmed for D3D, it's programmed using a version of DX.
New versions are backwards compatible, but old versions can't be forward
compatible (of course). It's kind of like when I switched from Chief
Architect 7 to 9. 9 has more options and a different way of handling
things, but it will bring up ver. 7 files. Version 7 won't bring up ver. 9
files, however. Even if I draw a house plan in Chief Architect 9 and don't
use any features that are not available in version 7, version 7 can't bring
up the plans.
Games written with DX9 simply require that you have DX9 installed on your
system (to decode the game properly), not that your video card has to
interpret DX9 instructions. DX9 is backwards compatible with video cards
that only support DX8 or DX7, but those cards can't use new "DX9 only"
instructions.
To my knowledge, there are few current games that use DX9 'only'
instructions. I'm not aware that DX has any specific hardware acceleration.
That's done with your video card hardware and drivers. It's only different
programming options/choices and features. Some DX9 algorithms may be more
efficient than previous DX versions, so they could be performed faster. It's
likely that DX9 will give us better texture options and a few more features.
I hope this clears things up a bit.

Now, for the FX5200. In most games, according to the charts I've seen, it's
faster than some GF-MX cards and slower than others (like the MX460). Since
it's not a 'fast' card, graphics options are likely to be turned down in
order to get acceptable frame rates in the games you play. So, being capable
of interpreting DX9 instructions is kind of a moot point.

Gary

 

[Dark Avenger]

I don't have to read a benchmark website, I just have to play a game
with my system and have actual first hand experience. Damn, this
reminds me of people with no kids giving parenting advice...


Try running NFSU without DX9. Oops.


I'm not saying that an FX5200 card is a great gaming card, I'm saying
that in my direct experience it is very usable and a if you have a
very tight budget, you can't really do better for $60.


Enjoy,

TLW

NFS:U runs great on GF4 ti cards... and even on MX I have heard. ...
Yes you need to install DirectX9, but the game doesn't REQUIRES DX9.
On my ati card.. DX9 ofcourse.. I can easily play it. And yes it gives
acces to more eye-candy. Though the difference aint that much yet!

I played Max Pain II for instance, nice game.. runs a few DX9 effects
for the rest fully DX8!

And I must say I can life with the eye candy and I can also do
without! And many gamers think that way, not everybody has the money
for the latest and most strongest piece of graphic hardware.

My ATI 9500 Pro, though a bit old.. market wise seen runs perfectly
only beaten by the GF4 ti in a few games.. a few games programmed in
ways to use the GF4 ti to it's max.

In the other games, like Max Pain II, .. my ati runs it much smoother
and better. Eye candy on it is great!

But back on topic, the FX5200 is generally slower as the GF4 in games
and even if a game REQUIRES DX9 ( thus you can't play it on an GF4 ti
) we are many more months further and the FX5200 is at that time a
slow piece of doorwedge, able to just do 1 FPS in that nice eye candy
game.

For many months to come though the GF 4ti will give many games the
basic speed needed, but .. with the ati's and the FX'es those games
will at a certain point move over to a new card.

Hope this helped you allot in your search for the holy word regarding
graphic cards and life in general!

 

[GTX_SlotCar]

I realize that I am relying on personal experience rather
than heresay and benchmarks.

and then......

It is a bit better than the fastest GF4 MX cards.

Let's face it, we all rely on benchmarks to some extent. They can be a
valuable tool and save a lot of testing time and a lot of money, not having
to buy all those video cards. We have to judge for ourselves whether or not
the benchmarks seem objective.

I'm not intimating that the FX5200 is a bad card (meaning that it's plagued
with driver issues or lockups or a poor quality display), only that it's
probably not the right card for some of the newer games.

Gary

 

[Darthy]

Short version: Is FX5200 better than gforce 4?

Longer version:
The game I'm looking forward to playing when released (Thief 3)
requires at least gforce 3, NOT MX, DirectX 9, with vertex pixel
shading. In my case it must also work under Win98 1st edition. I
got a card off the net which didn't state the platform and which
I eventually found would only work in Win98 SE and later so I
gave that someone else and went to a local shop instead.

I asked for geforce 4 in the shop and was so pre-occupied with
making sure it worked in Win98 1E that I didn't notice until I
got home it was not geforce 4 but FX5200. I asked on the net and
was told this was inferior even to geforce3. Back to the shop
where the manager insisted that was nonsense and the FX5200 was
better than gforce 4. He was so certain he literally signed my
receipt, "better than geforce 4 - (next level up)"

Questions:

1. Is he right?

NO... the 5200fx is a shit card. Its below standards of a Ti4200.

But its better than the MX440.

2. Is there anywhere on the net I can get an overview of the
evolution of graphics cards in general, the jargon, etc. so I
have some idea what all these letters, numbers, and so on mean?

Yep... here:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html

use this page to show the moron:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-03.html#unreal_tournament_2003

notice: The Ti4200-64mb gets 54.4fps while the 5200 ULTRA is 42 (Non
Ultra 128bit = 33fps, 440mx 30fps - fx5600 = STILL SLOWER at 46fps)

Note: Ti4200s are HARD to come bye.

Hes an idiot... Tell us about his reaction.... he doesnt know shit
about gaming systems.

So the LEAST card you should have (modern) is the 5600Ultra.
But for the price (About $175) you can get the 5900xt which scorses a
healthy 92fps!

NOTE: GF3 is a DX8 video card. GF4-TI is a DX 8.1 video card. If
you requested a DX9 card - then the 5200 is a DX9 part - but useless
for actual DX9 much less DX8 gaming.

You might have paid $100 for that crap card, when $75 more buys you 3x
the performance!

 

[Darthy]

Thanks. This is a bit clearer now and I think the salesman spoke
in good faith but I might have a case for arguing that I did
originally say NOT MX and this FX5200 seems only fractionally
better than the the low end GF4 MX, ie, about that sort of
range. It was a relatively inexpensive card and I can only take
so much hassle before I start wondering if it's worth it. I
should get my brother in law to pursue it. He just grinds away
forever and ever when he feels agrieved until they just give in
to get rid of him!

Wish I'd seen that Tom's Hardware site before - especially that
chart.

Guess I'll sit on the card and accept the loss. I'll try it in
low res when the game comes out to see if it is playable at all
then have a rethink then. By the time the game comes out its
required spec might have gone up anyway as the last report I
heard is already months old.

Thanks for all responses which has been very helpful.

Depending on your local laws, you DO have the right to return the card
or whole computer.

The manager WROTE on your recipt "faster than the GF4" - you can
dispute that. Anyone who knows anything about gaming cards KNOW the
5200fx cards are slow as shit.

The 5200 was always a crap card.... its not acceptable.

 

[Darthy]

The FX5200 is a good value. I picked up a 128MB card from CompUSA on
sale under $60 after the rebate and am pleased with it. It's not as
good as my ATI 9600 Pro, but it was also half the price and works well
in my secondary system. It will play Need For Speed Underground
fairly nicely on my P-III 800 box.

Yeah... and for $15 more more (without a rebate) A card that is 2~3
times faster could be had.... hence the 5200 is a crap card....

But in a PIII system, a GF3 would be held back by that CPU.

 

[Darthy]

Yepp... that's definitly better analogy.
But aren't dx9 capable cards (5700, 9600 for example) suppose to be faster
in dx9 games (when come out) than non-dx8 cards (ti4400 or 9500) of similiar
class and speed?

Nope - its about ABILITY for eye candy.

Generally, with video cards - as they ADD abilty - they ADD
performance... but as with the 5200 and ATI9600se - that is not always
the case.

 

[Darthy]

Have you actually tried it? No.

Uh... look at the links I and others have provided from tomshardware -
and that was done on a P4 3.2Ghz system.

I have a 5200 in my home for a test setup, it doesn't actually get
used.... its a crap card for gaming.

So you add that to a slow CPU, then you have problems.

Actually, in a DX9 game like Need For Speed Underground, there are a
lot of eye candy features that you can't turn on unless your card has
DX9 support. It's not a speed issue so much as an issue of
apability. Even using an FX5200 allows you to select visual features
hat are not available with a non-DX9 card.

But because the 5200 performs like a 2 cyclner engine with broken
pistons, it doesn't matter - you cant USE those options and get game
play at the same time. Also NFS Underground isn't a very demanding
game.

A real video card can have ALL the settings cranked up on high and
playing in 1280x1024 or higher rez.

So features don't mean squat if you cant use them.

Te FX5200 is roughly comparable to the 9600SE card. I have one and it
Works fine. I realize that I am relying on personal experience rather
than heresay and benchmarks. Please forgive me...

True... depenidng on the 5200... for a PCI only system, its the best
you can get. It's still not even 1/2 the video card of a Ti4200.

My info is based on Personal experince and benchmarks from reputable
sources.

Here are the video cards in my home (some are not used in MY
computers)
9800Pro / 9000Pro / Ti4200 / 5200PCI / 5900. I've worked recently
with the 9200 and 9600se as well.

 

[Darthy]

If you don't have DX9, Need For Speed will not run at all.

bu bu BWAHAHAH Thats some seriously funny shit!

Man.. thats funny. You win the FOOL away for this MONTH.

DirectX 9 is the 3D standard by Microsoft. Yes, the game may require
it to play. The video card can be a DX7 GF2-MX and it'll still
play... crappy, but still load and run.

hence... there are NO games on the market that require ONLY DX9 video
cards.... as most of the market is still DX7...

DX7 = GF2 / GF4mx (renamed GF2 cards) ATI 7xxx.

And I supposed Intel's "Extreme3D" is a DX7, if that - which is what
is used in MOST computers.

 

[Andrew]

DirectX 9 is the 3D standard by Microsoft. Yes, the game may require
it to play. The video card can be a DX7 GF2-MX and it'll still
play... crappy, but still load and run.

DirectX != Direct3D.

A game can require DX9 without requiring a graphics card that has DX9
Direct3D functions. Tim is correct.