View Single Post
Old 02-21-05, 07:25 PM   #2
Stop looking at me
MustangSVT's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,602
Default Re: FX 5700LE vs. FX 5700

Im trying to upgrade from my 5 year old Ti 4200
Ti4200's came out less than 3 years ago.
iv tryed looking for a 5900 but not many of them around in my price range.
Why a GeForce FX? After the whole 3DMark2005 thing, why are people still interested in a GeForce FX at all? nVIDIA obviously made a mistake with them and they're completely useless in terms of future proof.

So I though lets try 5700...well I saw that it had three types,the 5700, the 5700LE, And the 5700 Ultra.
5700LE and 5700 are slower than a TI4200, and the 5700U is only marginally faster than a TI4200, as in you won't end up playing games at higher settings and no real IQ improevement.

Im lookin around for somethin under about $140.
The only upgrade that actually provides more performance for that money is a used 9700pro/9800np/9800pro. r
eason is because I'v found a 5700 256mb 256-bit graghics core 128-Bit memory interface video card. Then iv got the 5700 LE 256Mb 128-bit graghics core 256-bit memory interface video card.
256MB versions of cards like FX 5700 are slower than 128MB versions. Both cards that you listed are slower than your TI4200.
1. Q6600 @ 3.2, ASUS P5Q Pro Turbo, Powercolor HD 4890 CrossFire, 4GB Mushkin DDR2-1066, 3x 24" LCD, Matrox TripleHead2Go, Audigy 2 ZS

2. Q9550 @ 3.7, ASUS P5K, Galaxy 8800GT G92, 2GB Mushkin DDR2-1066, Samsung 710N + Samsung 205BW, Audigy 2 + SB Live! 5.1 (hooked up together, really), dad's comp

3. XP-M 2500+ @ 205x11.5, Gigabyte nForce2-400, GeForce4 Ti4200, 2x512MB OCZ DDR-400 "Premier", oldie
MustangSVT is offline   Reply With Quote