Wife's Card Dead...Need some help.

[scaryogre]

My wife's GeForce 3 Ti500 burned up the other day (think the fan stopped working). Anyway, I need to replace it and am having trouble deciding on what to do. Here's the situation:

My son has a GF Ti4200 64MB card in his Intel P4 2.2GHz (an overclocked 1.6GHz) PC. He will definitely want to play some of the newer games, especially World of Warcraft. I thought about moving his Ti4200 over to my wife's computer and buying him a newer video card. I've also considered building my son a newer computer.

My wife likes games occasionally, but nothing more than the Sims 2 or something of that nature. She only has an AMD 1.0GHz system so is highly CPU limited (i.e. most newgen cards are way overkill for her needs).

Here are the options as I see it:

OPTION1: Replace my wife's dead card with an FX5200 128MB which can be had for $39.99 after rebates at CompUSA

OPTION2: Replace my wife's dead card with my son's Ti4200 64MB and buy him a FX 5700LE for $120. Would the 5700LE be faster than his Ti4200?

OPTION3: Replace my wife's dead card with my son's Ti4200 64MB and buy him a 5900XT for $190 or so.

Thoughts on these options or other suggestions? Thanks for any help!

[anzak]

I would recommend buying your son a Radeon 9800 Pro (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-142-009&depa=0) which is will be a lot faster in up coming games. The FX 5700le is a lot slower than a Ti 4200 and should be avoided at all cost. The same goes for the whole FX line really.

[MustangSVT]

Don't buy any of the FX cards. Get your son a 9800 Pro 128MB (256-bit) which is around $190. At newegg.com, they have a MSI 9800 Pro 128MB (Retail) for $185, which also comes with 3 full games (Prince of Persia Sands of Time, XIII, URU Ages Beyond Myst). Stay away from any of the FX cards. The FX5200 (any of them) is worse than the GeForce3 Ti500, and the FX5700LE is a much worser card than the Ti4200.

[kahloq]

Don't buy any of the FX cards. Get your son a 9800 Pro 128MB (256-bit) which is around $190. At newegg.com, they have a MSI 9800 Pro 128MB (Retail) for $185, which also comes with 3 full games (Prince of Persia Sands of Time, XIII, URU Ages Beyond Myst). Stay away from any of the FX cards. The FX5200 (any of them) is worse than the GeForce3 Ti500, and the FX5700LE is a much worser card than the Ti4200.


Scrap all of those suggestions. Get a 6600GT AGP for same price as that 9800 pro and has better performance as well as being newgen card with newer features and support. I dont think 6600GT is available yet in AGP version tho. So, you best bet probably is buy that cheap card...wait a few months and then get a 6600GT agp. You will be better off in the long run then buying a 9800pro. Plus, the 6600GT will be a 256MB card compared to that 9800pro with 128.

BTW, the whole FXline isnt a bunch of doo doo as some are trying to mislead you. It is true, however, that the Nvidia 5x series didnt perform as well as the ATI 9x series in D3D games, however they did outperform ATI's cards in opengl. It is obvious that the individual I quoted doesnt know what hes talking about and is showing his preference to ATI. The 5700LE is not slower then the ti4200 and the fx 5200 is not slower then a gf3 ti 500. The 5700LE is slower then the fx 5600, but faster then an fx5200 and all gf4 series. The fx 5200is NOT slower then a gf3 ti 500, but is slower then a gf4 ti 4600, but faster then the ti 4200.

If you prefer nvidia then stay with them and get what i suggested or maybe get the fx5900. However, you should be aware that there are many flavors of the new 6x line and nvidia has released a 6200 for mainstream use and will be faster the fxline, but not by much as should be priced in the mid 50's up to around $100. The 6600Gt is priced at 199 and the 6600 non gt is priced at 149 MSRP. Just some food for thought, especailly since you've gotten all biased oppinionated information in favor of ATI which isnt accurate.

[anzak]

BTW, the whole FXline isnt a bunch of doo doo as some are trying to mislead you. It is true, however, that the Nvidia 5x series didnt perform as well as the ATI 9x series in D3D games, however they did outperform ATI's cards in opengl. It is obvious that the individual I quoted doesnt know what hes talking about and is showing his preference to ATI. The 5700LE is not slower then the ti4200 and the fx 5200 is not slower then a gf3 ti 500. The 5700LE is slower then the fx 5600, but faster then an fx5200 and all gf4 series. The fx 5200is NOT slower then a gf3 ti 500, but is slower then a gf4 ti 4600, but faster then the ti 4200

Im sorry but most of this is total BS.

CS: Source is based off of the source engine which will power Half Life 2.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_fx_half-life2/images/tri1280.gif

As you can see the Geforce 5950 got 26fps in DX9 and the 9800XT got 67fps. That is over twice as fast! Yes, the FX series is crap in DirectX 9.

As you can see here: http://www.ixbt.com/video2/over2k4-ut-1024.shtml both the GF3 Ti 200 and 500 are faster than the 5200 and the Ti 4200 easily beats the 5700le.

If you can wait two months or so for the 6600GT and X700XT to be released do it. But it sounds to me like you need something now and in that case go with the Radeon 9800 pro.

It's also funny you say im bias to ATI when I own a Geforce 6800GT. :rolleyes:

[aAv7]

6600 GT is your best bet for price/performance but I don't think it's due out for a few months (by the time it gets to retail at least) So if you need to go with something now, I say grab the 9800 Pro. It's 199.99 or so and you can usually find a rebate or two with it as well at places like Best Buy, Circuit City or Compusa....even if you have a Fry's (which would be your best bet) Don't get anything from the FX series though, doesnt have the power for future games really. Not that the 9800 Pro will last forever, but it will last longer, and it will run everything out today and do a fine job at Half life 2 and Counter-Strike : Source, should your son choose to buy that combo. Goodluck.

[NightFire]

Well, if you'd like the straight advice from only the options you gave me, I would recommend buying your son the 5900xt, as it seems to be the fastest card there.

However, I would recommend buying a 9800 pro instead, as you'll get a lot more bang for the buck.

[WeReWoLf]

Im sorry but most of this is total BS.

CS: Source is based off of the source engine which will power Half Life 2.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_fx_half-life2/images/tri1280.gif

As you can see the Geforce 5950 got 26fps in DX9 and the 9800XT got 67fps. That is over twice as fast! Yes, the FX series is crap in DirectX 9.

As you can see here: http://www.ixbt.com/video2/over2k4-ut-1024.shtml both the GF3 Ti 200 and 500 are faster than the 5200 and the Ti 4200 easily beats the 5700le.

If you can wait two months or so for the 6600GT and X700XT to be released do it. But it sounds to me like you need something now and in that case go with the Radeon 9800 pro.

It's also funny you say im bias to ATI when I own a Geforce 6800GT. :rolleyes:

But the thing is, the only reason that nvidia is losing out frames in HL2 is because Valve is in bed with ATi. They refused to code HL2 properly to fully support the FX range in dx9 to make them seem worse than the ATi cards, which "are fully supported". The statement that kahloq is 100% true in every way, shape and form, it's just that using the HL2 engine as a guideline is a bad reference because of purposeful derogitory stance towards nvidia.

[scaryogre]

Thanks for all the advice and replies. Unfortunately, I doubt an ATi 9800 Pro will work for my son as much as I wish that it would. I bought one about 4 months ago as an upgrade and could not get it to work properly (possibly because of the overclock I have on that system and the inability to change the AGP bus ratio). It would lockup after a short period of time in nearly every game I threw at it.

However, the Ti4200 in that system has worked flawlessly for 2+ years now. I wish the 9800 Pro would work, but I tried everything short of eliminating the overclock (because it would negate the system speed too much). I tried several re-format and re-installations and different Catalyst driver sets, but no go. Thus, I may be "stuck" with the Ti4200 on that system.

I guess I will just see if I can get a Ti4200 off of Ebay on the cheap for my wife's system. Then maybe build a new system for my son for Christmas...

One more question: Even if the Ti4200 is only DX 8.1 compliant it will still run fine with games that require DX 9.0c correct? Just won't have all the features supported?

[anzak]

But the thing is, the only reason that nvidia is losing out frames in HL2 is because Valve is in bed with ATi. They refused to code HL2 properly to fully support the FX range in dx9 to make them seem worse than the ATi cards, which "are fully supported".

No, nvidia is losing because the FX really sucks at PS2.0. I can't believe people still argue about this. It has been proven over and over again.

The statement that kahloq is 100% true in every way, shape and form, it's just that using the HL2 engine as a guideline is a bad reference because of purposeful derogitory stance towards nvidia.

Read my whole post. To back up what I said about the the FX 5200 and 5700LE I used UT2003 not Half Life 2. I provided proof that the Geforce 3 Ti 500 is faster than the 5200 and the Ti 4200 is faster than the 5700LE.

[kahloq]

It's also funny you say im bias to ATI when I own a Geforce 6800GT. :rolleyes:

I didnt specifically say you, but, you do tend to praise the ATI's considerbly more then nvidia's....so yeah you do have a somewhat biased attitude even tho you own a 6800gt.

Also, the CS: Stress tests are NOT OpenGL and I never stated the fx 5x series were better then ati in D3D. In fact I said the opposite. Congrats on linking A site that shows what you tried to say. But one site running limited tests in only a few special areas does not mean that the real world performance is what they want you to believe. I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing you are that niave to take one site's limited testing to mean absolute truth.
You should know better then to say that a gf3 ti 500 is faster then an fx5200(unless of course that 5200 only had 64mb). You know thats untrue. Maybe in a few timedemo's or some instances, a chart can make it look that way, but it reality its not slower and you know that. Generally 5200's came with 128 and that is of course an assumption I had to make that you or the original thread starter was referring to......ie a 128mb fx5200

Enough bickering and it doesnt do the original poster any good for us to through arguements back and forth on whether a gf3 is faster then a low end fx 5x. He wants to know what to buy.

[kahloq]

But the thing is, the only reason that nvidia is losing out frames in HL2 is because Valve is in bed with ATi. They refused to code HL2 properly to fully support the FX range in dx9 to make them seem worse than the ATi cards, which "are fully supported". The statement that kahloq is 100% true in every way, shape and form, it's just that using the HL2 engine as a guideline is a bad reference because of purposeful derogitory stance towards nvidia.

This is the point I was trying to get across and doesnt apply jsut to HL2 or CS stress tests. Most of you know that the majority of review sites are biased towards ONE brand or another and tend to post charts and praise that support their biased position overtop actually showing true and accurate information about both ati and nvidia. Yes, you can use almsot any game and do whatever tests you can come up with and make them sound important and even show a low end recent card performing worse then a card 2 generations before that one. Its simply just a bunch of BS. Its like Politics. You hear only what the person speaking(or reviewer) wants you to hear.

[NightFire]

kahloq, old boy, I think I've hit upon a rather spiffing idea that could reduce the level of misinformation in these parts. We could start a compendium of review, gathering all data that has been published, and then generate honest, unbiased opinions on the matter.

How about it, eh? Or has that already been done? I'm too lazy to search.

[kahloq]

A nice database comprising of multiple site's results concerning the last few generations of vid cards with numerical averages as well would be a great idea. Except, lol, who's gonna spend the time to do it? I have college classes and full time job, so it won't be me :(

[anzak]

kahloq, old boy, I think I've hit upon a rather spiffing idea that could reduce the level of misinformation in these parts. We could start a compendium of review, gathering all data that has been published, and then generate honest, unbiased opinions on the matter.

How about it, eh? Or has that already been done? I'm too lazy to search.


This is getting way off topic. We need to ether get back on topic or start a new thread.

A nice database comprising of multiple site's results concerning the last few generations of vid cards with numerical averages as well would be a great idea. Except, lol, who's gonna spend the time to do it? I have college classes and full time job, so it won't be me :(

I don't have school tomorrow. I'll do the research. Anyways, we need a new thread.

[mattkenn_4545]

Id recommend a 6800nu ~300 but they perform see sig

[kahloq]

Thanks for all the advice and replies. Unfortunately, I doubt an ATi 9800 Pro will work for my son as much as I wish that it would. I bought one about 4 months ago as an upgrade and could not get it to work properly (possibly because of the overclock I have on that system and the inability to change the AGP bus ratio). It would lockup after a short period of time in nearly every game I threw at it.

However, the Ti4200 in that system has worked flawlessly for 2+ years now. I wish the 9800 Pro would work, but I tried everything short of eliminating the overclock (because it would negate the system speed too much). I tried several re-format and re-installations and different Catalyst driver sets, but no go. Thus, I may be "stuck" with the Ti4200 on that system.

I guess I will just see if I can get a Ti4200 off of Ebay on the cheap for my wife's system. Then maybe build a new system for my son for Christmas...

One more question: Even if the Ti4200 is only DX 8.1 compliant it will still run fine with games that require DX 9.0c correct? Just won't have all the features supported?

Well I can't say it will run fine. It will play the games, but the performance will suffer. I had ti 4600 in my sons computer a little while ago and it played UT2004 just fine. Yes it wont show features that dx9 supports, but should play the game, but over 800x600 resolution, your going to run into serious issues with lag.

[aAv7]

rofl.....I love threads like this....they never fail to cease.....one guy asks a simple question and it turns into a flame war over cards.

[WeReWoLf]

No, nvidia is losing because the FX really sucks at PS2.0. I can't believe people still argue about this. It has been proven over and over again.

Read my whole post. To back up what I said about the the FX 5200 and 5700LE I used UT2003 not Half Life 2. I provided proof that the Geforce 3 Ti 500 is faster than the 5200 and the Ti 4200 is faster than the 5700LE.

I didn't say that you were wrong. Oh and BTW i wasn't talking about poor PS2.0 performance. I was referring to the fact the the FX series should be pulling in a decent framerate in dx9 hl2 seeing as farcry is playable on it and it uses many more shaders than hl2. Shaders shouldn't have that much of an effect on the fx series within HL2. As i stated before Valve is in bed with ATi, so that in effect leaves the nvidia drivers compliance with very little if any support whatsoever. As for the other part of your argument, i do realise that the Ti500 is faster than the 5200 and the 4200 is faster than the 5700LE. i just find it a little pissy that us (the people with the high end FX cards) are left with last generation graphics because of ATi trying to improve it's sales over Nvidia. DAMN YOU ATI! DON'T TAKE IT OUT ON THE GAMERS!