Discussion in 'QnA (read only)' started by Mahender_Topgun, Sep 26, 2004.
what is it advisable to go in for a geforce 4 ti now....
if so what is the price(new).
it's better if u get an fx series card....ti series is kinda old
but its no lesser than the FX's .its according to ur budget mate.
geforce 4 ti is an old war horse but still as much worthy as it was then.
you can get it if your budget is restricted.
but now a days it is hard to get through the dealers, you have to search a lot.
if you do not find it and your budget can be extended little you can get a geforce fx 5200 or 5700 at the least.
i do not know exactly the performance range of the ati cards but still radeon 9200 should be in the sme range.
It's better to go for a gforce4 ti rather than a weak fx card. ti will cost less if u compare it to a card of same performance of fx series. thats why i bought a ti4200. and dont go for a fx 5200 its really weak considering the games today. fx 5200 will cost abt 3500 and a ti4200 for 7500,ti4400 for 8500, ti4600 abt 10500 approx.
I suggest staying away from DX8.1 cards, be it the GeForce 4 Ti or the Radeon 9200. The GeForce FX 5200 is a good choice for someone with a low budget, but the X300 is even better.
Stay away from fx 5200 . one of my friends has 5200 and has to compromise on each game details and performance so i strongly recommend a ti . I played doom3 very well and mt friend having 5200 had to compromise on doom3 a lot ,here is a screenshot of doom3 from my ti4200
The 5200 can run fragment shaders that the Ti can only dream of. All of the special effects like heat haze need a DX9 level card. So what if the FX 5200 can run the game decently only at 800x600? The Ti ain't gonna be able to come close to the FX 5200 visually anyway!
But dude whats the point if it can display lotsa gfx candy but doesnt have enuf power to process it.
You can play the game with all those cool effects at a lower resolution just as fast as the Ti. With the Ti, you can't even see those effects though you're playing at a higher resolution.
I dont understand ....... what is the point if the framerates are choppy on a 5200 better play it on a 4200 or a 4400 with decent framerates. effects are less noticable than framerates.The main thing is the budget, if u have 3500-4000 bucks then 5200 is not a bad choice , if u hav a little more budget then a ti will do the job better.
and for ur info i've had both the cards and i know better how 5200 lacks in performance.....see yourself
Test system -
Pentium 4C 2.4GHz with Hyper-Threading
Intel 865GBF Motherboard
256x2MB Kingston 400MHz DDR-3200 (Dual Channel)
Seagate 80GB HDD - 7200 RPM
3dMark 2001 se
FX 5200 ------------------- 5992 3d marks
Ti 4200 ------------------- 11640 3d marks
Ti 4400 ------------------- 12510 3d marks
3d Mark 2003
FX 5200 ------------------- 692 3d marks
Ti 4200 ------------------- 1733 3d marks
Ti 4400 ------------------- 1798 3d marks
See ti series has a good score even in 3D mark 2003 where not all tests ran (pixel shader , mother nature, etc) then also the score is far better then the 5200 . i agree ti is a bit costly(so obvious) then 5200 but it is worth it.
u r most probably lying anidex becoz the 5200 cannot handle doom3 on 800x600 res decently on high settings. Man, i have seen doom3 on, fx5200 the game kills the card even on low res of 800x600 on high settings . ur right abt that cool heat haze effect but what is the point talking abt special effects if the card dosen't have enuf power to handle them .
Watch your tongue buddy.
The high setting in Doom 3 only uses uncompressed color maps. It doesn't introduce any new shaders. Anyway, you should only run the high setting on top mainstream cards like the 9500 Pro /5600 Ultra and above cards. You'd be a fool to run the game at high settings on an FX 5200 will such limited bandwidth.
Run the game at 800x600 at the medium setting and you'll be able to enjoy all the special effects, of course, with compressed color maps.
I think tarey_g is right here ....!!!! the very reason i upgraded from 5200 Fx to 5700 Fx is my MSi FX5200 coudlnt handlt decent games at 800x600 ....actually when ever i turned on anyeffect i used to get 5 to 6 FPS helll...DAmn it !!!!!
My geforce 3 was lot better than fx5200....At least it didint pretend to run Applealing visuals....when it cant ..
Anyway setteled the issur for once and all with Gigabyte Fx5700...but still i suggest geforce 4 Ti is lot better than Fx5200...any day!!!!
what does this Gigabyte Fx5700 cost?
Mahender_Topgun its not advisable to go for a fx or even a Tio since Ti is a generation old card and Fx5200 doesnt have enuf juice. Better go for a Radeon 9600 or a 9600pro for 6.8k and 8.5k respectively. Believe me u wont regret it.
whatever little i read on the web it says that 5700 has a better bandwidth compared to a 9600. Will this not translate to a better performance tecnically?
Technically yes, practically no. Check out the scores people got on the "The GRAPHICS CARDS List" for a good example of how badly the GeForce FX cards perform when put under extreme floating point math stress.
I agree with anidex on the performance of FX cards . better go for a ti
Don't buy a plain 9600 (or even worse a 5700 pure), try getting a 9600XT. Higher bandwidth, transistor count, pixel processing capabilities are, at best, only indicative of a GPUs capabilites. Most of the time they are highly misleading. E.g. the FX5800 had higher bandwidth and transistor count than the Radeon 9700, but failed to beat it in most tests. At its best performance it was only able to equal the 9700.
So, if your budget does not permit a 9600XT, go for a Ti. I can personally attest to its great performance.
Separate names with a comma.