PDA

View Full Version : GF3 Vs. GF FX 5200


Pages : [1] 2

Hooligan
02-19-04, 08:20 AM
Does anyone have an idea of what gameplay is like between the original GeForce 3 and the GeForce FX 5200. Would I have an increase in framerates at all?

The reason that I ask is that I got a new PC at work with the 5200 in it and the GF3 at home and had thought about swapping the 2 boards. I don't game at work at all..

Any suggestions on this?


Thanks,

Hooli

saturnotaku
02-19-04, 08:25 AM
It depends on if the 5200 is a 64- or 128-bit board. If you can cough up a specific brand/model of the 5200 we could tell you for sure. Should it be a 64-bit one, performance will be worse than the GeForce3, if it's a 128-bit card, it will perform slightly better. The difference won't be dramatic, but if you're looking for an interim card to get you by until the NV40/R420, it should be just fine...though looking at your system specs, your CPU is going to be a very limiting factor in extracting the most performance from the video card.

Though since you're taking the 5200 out of an office computer, I would be willing to bet it's a 64-bit card.

DSC
02-19-04, 08:47 AM
The 128bit FX5200NU(250/400) is around the performance of the GF3 Ti200(175/400), it cannot touch the original GF3(200/460) or the GF3 Ti500(240/500).

zoomy942
02-19-04, 10:03 AM
with you pc you might put it in, you wouldnt se a difference that you would notice. you pc is what would be the bottleneck.

Edge
02-19-04, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by DSC
The 128bit FX5200NU(250/400) is around the performance of the GF3 Ti200(175/400), it cannot touch the original GF3(200/460) or the GF3 Ti500(240/500).

The benchmarks I saw had the 5200 coming in around TI500 speeds, I'm pretty sure an FX5200 is at the very least as fast as an original GF3. Also the FX5200 has a few more AA optimisations and DX9 capabilities, but those are pretty minor points.

But if you already have a GF3 you're better off getting a FX5900 or ATI9700 (or better) or waiting until the next videocard generation. Since your only option is a straight swap between the two, I'd say do it if it's easy, but don't expect any big improvements or anything out of the FX5200, mainly just a few new features (and it's almost worth it just to run Dawn ;)).

But yeah, try checking to see if it's a 64-bit card, a lot of the "value" FX5200s are like that, and they're total garbage for games (probably around GF2MX speed).

zoomy942
02-19-04, 04:59 PM
if you wanted, just spend $30 more and get a 5600. its not great at all but at least it would help your slow cpu out more than a 5200 would

ragejg
02-19-04, 05:26 PM
bah, the 5600 I've worked with definitely felt like a weak GF3, and basically proved it by scoring 10.6k in 3dmark01 in my barton setup, as the ti500 I had scored 10.9k...

I'd think that GF3 eats 5200's... it might have ahard time digesting an ultra however, as the BGA memory probably helps those cards feel a bit nimbler...

I can now officially say myself that the GF3 is really startin to feel old... just try to play farcry on a GF3... /me cries

anzak
02-19-04, 07:02 PM
Well remember this, the geforce FX cards work at there Best on an AGP 8x slot. If you put them cards into a 4x or heaven forbid a 2x slot performance does drop. Just buy a new PC from www.ibuypower.com for $750 to $1000, they have a good reseller and BBB rating. But if you keep your current setup, just keep the GF3, it will do you fine in HL2 and Doom]I[ since the rest of your pc is a bottle neck.

ragejg
02-19-04, 07:04 PM
performance BARELY drops at all when kicking to 4x... seriously. Dang marketing tool, ... it got you, anzak! :p

anzak
02-19-04, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by ragejg
performance BARELY drops at all when kicking to 4x... seriously. Dang marketing tool, ... it got you, anzak! :p

It's not just a marketing tool, the 5200 drops from 8000 in 3dmark01 to around 6000 which is PCI card level. Now the Geforce 4 Ti 4200 8x AGP and Radeon 9200 are marketing tools since there cores were designed for the 4x bus.

ragejg
02-19-04, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by anzak
It's not just a marketing tool, the 5200 drops from 8000 in 3dmark01 to around 6000 which is PCI card level. Now the Geforce 4 Ti 4200 8x AGP and Radeon 9200 are marketing tools since there cores were designed for the 4x bus.

Linky please...

anzak
02-19-04, 07:48 PM
Give me some time to dig up the reviews.

anzak
02-19-04, 07:58 PM
8x AGP

(7913)

http://www.overclockercafe.com/Reviews/VGA/Inno3D_FX5200/pg_3.htm

4x AGP

(5408)

http://www.voodoofiles.com/review.asp?Name=1036

Even though the 4x AGP test had a faster processor it was hamperd by the bus speed. I have found this to be the case with every 5200 review I have found.

ragejg
02-19-04, 08:01 PM
interesting...

:)

Edge
02-19-04, 08:20 PM
Huh, that would explain some of the review discrepancies with the FX series. I always wondered how the FX5200 could be faster than a GF3, which is faster than a 9200, which is faster than a FX5200 :confused: :confused: :confused:

Edit: actually that would also explain why the 9000/9200 cards are better than the FX5200 and even the FX5600 in PCI mode but worse in AGP mode. If the cards are made for a high system bandwidth and you stick it into a 4x, 2x, or PCI limit, it's bound to have some performance issues. Interesting...can anyone with a 4x/8x capable motherboard and an FX card do a quick benchmark for verification? This could certainly change the outlook on FX cards a bit.

Gator
02-19-04, 08:34 PM
Originally posted by Hooligan
Does anyone have an idea of what gameplay is like between the original GeForce 3 and the GeForce FX 5200. Would I have an increase in framerates at all?...

Athlon T'bird 1Ghz
512 MB PC133 Sdram w/Abit KT7-Raid
Visiontek GeForce 3
30GB WD; 20GB Maxtor
Logitech Z-560
SBLive! X-Gamer (sux)
Windows XP Pro
Viewsonic 19" Monitor


You're system specs are really gonna hold you back from any decent gaming. I would rather see you purchase a cheap FX5700NU because it has much more potential and overclockability than an FX5200, but furthermore try to upgrade that CPU you'd really benefit from it. I dont know if an Abit Kt7 can handle an AthlonXP2400, but it'd be a cheap way to get a speed boost while keeping your current memory. Although of course that SDRAM isn't gonna help your gaming either, but an AthlonXP2400 is so cheap anyway it'd probably be enough to tide you over :)

Malfunction
02-19-04, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by Edge
Huh, that would explain some of the review discrepancies with the FX series. I always wondered how the FX5200 could be faster than a GF3, which is faster than a 9200, which is faster than a FX5200 :confused: :confused: :confused:

Edit: actually that would also explain why the 9000/9200 cards are better than the FX5200 and even the FX5600 in PCI mode but worse in AGP mode. If the cards are made for a high system bandwidth and you stick it into a 4x, 2x, or PCI limit, it's bound to have some performance issues. Interesting...can anyone with a 4x/8x capable motherboard and an FX card do a quick benchmark for verification? This could certainly change the outlook on FX cards a bit.

AGPx8
RESULTS
3DMark Score 10731
Game 1 - Car Chase - Low Detail 147.2 fps
Game 1 - Car Chase - High Detail 73.1 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - Low Detail 159.9 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - High Detail 92.0 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - Low Detail 177.3 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - High Detail 89.6 fps
Game 4 - Nature 39.7 fps
AGPx4
RESULTS
3DMark Score 10640
Game 1 - Car Chase - Low Detail 147.0 fps
Game 1 - Car Chase - High Detail 71.8 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - Low Detail 159.1 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - High Detail 90.6 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - Low Detail 176.6 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - High Detail 89.5 fps
Game 4 - Nature 38.8 fps

Using the Forceware 56.55's, 53.03's obviously better for 3DMark which I had to install... grrr :) Hope this helps ya in your quest.

Peace,

:afro:

zoomy942
02-19-04, 09:42 PM
WAY TO GO GATOR! SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THAT 5700NU!!

Gator
02-19-04, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by zoomy942
WAY TO GO GATOR! SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THAT 5700NU!!

lol :D

Look the truth is the card is decent for the money. It's the lowest Nvidia card I am willing to recommend, and honestly if I needed a cheap replacement I would probably buy one myself.

Hooligan
02-19-04, 09:57 PM
Well thanks for all the reply's guys..I know my CPU is a bottleneck but it's lasted me for a lil over 3 years without any kind of upgrade so I think that has ben pretty awesome, and it still plays most games fairly well. If the performance between these 2 card is minimal then it really isnt worth me tearing into my pc to do the ole switcheroo...

I'm planning on upgrading before to long. But when it comes to the video cards between ATI and nVidia, I really don't know which way to go. I prefer image quality with FSAA as opposed to just plain raw frame rates so I'm kinda leaning towards the 9800 or 9600 model of ATI's.

Don't get me wrong, I have zero complaints about my GF3, it has been great and I have had no problems in the years that I have had it. It's just a hard decision now. Both teams are neck and neck. I have no plans to spend the $500 + bucks for a top of the line card..Thats just plain crazy in my book...
but again thanks for all the replys, yall sure have helped me out..


Hooli

anzak
02-19-04, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by Malfunction
AGPx8

quote:RESULTS
3DMark Score 10731
Game 1 - Car Chase - Low Detail 147.2 fps
Game 1 - Car Chase - High Detail 73.1 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - Low Detail 159.9 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - High Detail 92.0 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - Low Detail 177.3 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - High Detail 89.6 fps
Game 4 - Nature 39.7 fps


AGPx4

quote:RESULTS
3DMark Score 10640
Game 1 - Car Chase - Low Detail 147.0 fps
Game 1 - Car Chase - High Detail 71.8 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - Low Detail 159.1 fps
Game 2 - Dragothic - High Detail 90.6 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - Low Detail 176.6 fps
Game 3 - Lobby - High Detail 89.5 fps
Game 4 - Nature 38.8 fps





Using the Forceware 56.55's, 53.03's obviously better for 3DMark which I had to install... grrr :) Hope this helps ya in your quest.

Peace,

:afro: [/B]

Thanks!

Edge, The Geforce Fx 5200 is faster than the Radeon 9200 and about the same as a Radeon 9000 Pro

theultimo
02-19-04, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by anzak
Thanks!

Edge, The Geforce Fx 5200 is faster than the Radeon 9200 and about the same as a Radeon 9000 Pro


If its a 128-bit sure, bit I really feel sorry for the 64-bit ones....

The 5200 is a great budget card though, around the same performance as the Cheap Radeons. With 5303 -> Detnators^H^H^H^H^H^HForcewares, they do turn out passable gaming performance.....But The 5500/5700's are a MUCH better buy.

anzak
02-19-04, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by theultimo
If its a 128-bit sure, bit I really feel sorry for the 64-bit ones....

The 5200 is a great budget card though, around the same performance as the Cheap Radeons. With 5303 -> Detnators^H^H^H^H^H^HForcewares, they do turn out passable gaming performance.....But The 5500/5700's are a MUCH better buy.

Heh, over all what yes said is very true. Remember though the 5500 is running the nv34 core (Geforce FX 5200). And it is clocked at the same speed as the Geforce Fx 5200nu. IMO it sounds like a rebranding of the 5200 (ie. R8500-R9100)

Ady
02-20-04, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by anzak
Thanks!

Edge, The Geforce Fx 5200 is faster than the Radeon 9200 and about the same as a Radeon 9000 Pro

The 9200 is a 8XAGP version of the 9000. Thats how I remember it anyways. :confused:

zakelwe
02-20-04, 02:30 AM
I think that if you can get a 5200U with 3.3ns memory on it that would at least give you a bit of an edge over the gf3 series, though as said above for far cry / halo etc you could be attempting to choose between poo and poo. RTCW and SOF sort of game will be ok though.

I think I'd try and get the cheapest 5700 I could as well.

Regards

Andy