PDA

View Full Version : WOAH! whats goin on with geforce fx??


Matthius
05-02-03, 05:37 AM
ah, im confused...how come geforce fx 5200 vid cards cost $219 and the geforce 4 ti 4200 costs $300?!?!?!? which one is better? to me it looks like the fx, but why is it cheaper???

panzaman
05-02-03, 05:57 AM
I can't believe that there's still people thinking that an FX5200 is better than a 4200....
Don't you read the reviews around the web, surely if you browse these forums you'll have an idea that the FX5200 is a piece of crap, is a looser even againsta GeForce4MX how can it be better than a 4200??

Matthius
05-02-03, 06:06 AM
then why the hell is there so much hype about them everywhere...until they came out...
:confused:

panzaman
05-02-03, 06:18 AM
nVidia PR machine, obviously, fuelled the hype, but when the products came out on the market everybody has recognised that they have some flaws.
Stick with a GeForce 4 TI or ATI at the moment, a friend of mine has just abought a ATI 9000 and is a fabulous card, certainly more performant than the FX5200.

StealthHawk
05-02-03, 06:58 AM
Originally posted by Matthius
then why the hell is there so much hype about them everywhere...until they came out...
:confused:

Because it supports DX9, meaning that these budget cards, yes that's what they are, are up to date in the feature department. Unlike the gf4mx was. gf4mx came out in the DX8 generation, but it was a DX7 card.

It had good speed, but no DX8 hardware, and people bashed it for that.

the gfFX5200 is slow in raw speeds. Make no mistake about it. It gains some once FSAA is thrown into the equation.

Actually the gfFX5200Ultra is not a bad card, is that the one that costs $219 where you live? The regular gfFX5200 is pretty bad though.

Matthius
05-02-03, 07:01 AM
australia...prices are can be double, if not mor for pc parts here.

threedaysdwn
05-02-03, 02:29 PM
Yeah the FX series was designed to bring DX9 support to EVERY level of the market as quickly as possible.


The 5200 is the"bottom of the barrel" DX9 card.

The Ultra version is supposedly a respectable card and very cheap. And then there's the 5600 and 5600 Ultra that I've heard good thing about.

The high-end that you heard so much about, of course, is the FX 5800 (Ultra and non Ultra versions also available... err... "available").

flick556
05-03-03, 08:19 AM
grforce fx5200= 73$
geforce 4ti200=130$
gefoce fx5600=170$

fx5200 beat 4200 in some test but can't handle high resolutions. but you get much more features at a lower price.

http://www.3dgpu.com/reviews/fx5200_1.php

muzz
05-03-03, 10:41 AM
I personally would buy the 4200 if it were me....I would not spend $ on a slower card because it was DX9.... where are you going to use DX9?
Even if there were a bunch of titles out there, the games would be slideshows.

flick556
05-03-03, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by muzz
I personally would buy the 4200 if it were me....I would not spend $ on a slower card because it was DX9.... where are you going to use DX9?
Even if there were a bunch of titles out there, the games would be slideshows.

It's not a slower card fx5600 ultra is faster than ti4200.
and they cost almost the exact same price. add those things up and ti4200 needs a price drop soon to stay competive.

StealthHawk
05-04-03, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by flick556
It's not a slower card fx5600 ultra is faster than ti4200.
and they cost almost the exact same price. add those things up and ti4200 needs a price drop soon to stay competive.

That depends on the situation. the gfFX5600 is slower than the gf4Ti4200 in raw benchmarks, without FSAA being turned on.

It's also dreadfully slower in next gen games like Splinter Cell, amusingly enough. You would think that a next gen card would fare better in newer games than in older games against an last year's card, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Which quite frankly is disturbing.

DSC
05-04-03, 07:43 AM
With NV36 coming soon to replace NV31, I wouldn't worry too much about the current performance of NV31. It seems to be plagued with just as much hardware bugs as the NV30 that hurts its potential.

flick556
05-04-03, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
That depends on the situation. the gfFX5600 is slower than the gf4Ti4200 in raw benchmarks, without FSAA being turned on.

It's also dreadfully slower in next gen games like Splinter Cell, amusingly enough. You would think that a next gen card would fare better in newer games than in older games against an last year's card, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Which quite frankly is disturbing.

geforce fx 5600 has soom bugs in splinter cell, the test don't match up to other next gen benchmarks. the older test results using older drivers are much lower than benches done using newest drivers.gffx5600 can beet 4200 in many areas, but your right in raw benchmarks thier withen a few fps of each other.

flick556
05-04-03, 08:17 AM
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/nv31-nv34.html#p6

check this benchmark out it even shows right mark results
which shows the benifit of cg and direct x 9.0 allowing to even beat 9500. fx5600 wins quite a fiew of the 3dmark test over 4200 including high quality settings. But at higher resolutions with AA/AF off 4200 wins

muzz
05-04-03, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by flick556
It's not a slower card fx5600 ultra is faster than ti4200.
and they cost almost the exact same price. add those things up and ti4200 needs a price drop soon to stay competive.

Take a good look at the original post, and please tell me where the 5600 Ultra was mentioned......
That was the card I was referring to.
5200 NOT the 5600 ULTRA.

flick556
05-04-03, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by muzz
Take a good look at the original post, and please tell me where the 5600 Ultra was mentioned......
That was the card I was referring to.
5200 NOT the 5600 ULTRA.

Ok then, the 5200 ultra cost 70$ and will get even cheaper
The 4200 cost 150$ and is not as fast as other cards in that price range (5600). No sub 100$ card even comes remotely close to the 5200's numbers. Its direct completion includes radeon 9000, which it smokes, and the geforce 4mx which it also smokes. Not to mention it has direct x 9.0

Iím just trying to compare apples to apples here you can't expect ti4200 raw power at half the price. But this thing still gets pretty close.

StealthHawk
05-05-03, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by flick556
Ok then, the 5200 ultra cost 70$ and will get even cheaper
The 4200 cost 150$ and is not as fast as other cards in that price range (5600). No sub 100$ card even comes remotely close to the 5200's numbers. Its direct completion includes radeon 9000, which it smokes, and the geforce 4mx which it also smokes. Not to mention it has direct x 9.0

Um, no. The gfFX5200Ultra is something like $170.

And I don't know why you're comparing the lowest price of the gfFX5200(which you mislabel as the 5200Ultra) with the mid/high price of the gf4Ti4200. It doesn't make much sense.

Straight from pricewatch:
gfFX5200 128MB: $75
gfFX5200 64MB: $73
gf4Ti4200 64MB: $107
gf4Ti4200 128MB: $119

The gfFX5600 is not in the same price range as the gf4Ti4200 either.