It doesnt look good.
Originally posted by: Mingon
It doesnt look good.
Really, the 5200 in the review is the non-ultra and it is up against a 900 pro and a 9600 pro, what do you expect? I would say it does quite well and gets quite close in alot of tests.
Originally posted by: nick1985
my friend has a ti200, and he went out and bought a 5200. opinions?
think marketing is at the heard of all the nomenclature for ATI and Nvidia latest batch of cards. They put high number in the name, and put them on the shelf at Best Buy or ChumpUSA and ignorant people come along and fall for it. Price should be a big indicator! Well, they may get home and find the card play's their games, but disappointingly slow compared to what it could be.
The card nick was asking about is a non ultra. Also one of the cards that the 5200 loses to on a fair amount of benchmarks the MX 460, not exactly a speed demon. BTW the ultra isnt that much better it still gets its lunch eaten by a 4200.
Originally posted by: Mingon
The card nick was asking about is a non ultra. Also one of the cards that the 5200 loses to on a fair amount of benchmarks the MX 460, not exactly a speed demon. BTW the ultra isnt that much better it still gets its lunch eaten by a 4200.
But the point is that the card it loses to have far superior fill rate and memory bandwidth, so to get quite close is a good achievement
So the poor performance of the card is a "good achievment" when you take into account that its a POS ?!
At the end of the day, we are left looking at a landslide of sorts. Without question, the GeForce FX 5200 is the undisputed budget performance champion. Even with that said, newer games such as Splinter Cell and UT2K3 are going to almost require you go to 800x600 resolution with no AA or AF in order to get playable frame rates.
No other value-oriented card brings as much performance or support for the latest features as the NVIDIA 5200. This is not to say that the NVIDIA card is not without its faults. One look at the CodeCreatures results illustrates one of this card?s greatest faults. After all, what good is having support for the latest pixel and vertex shaders if the shaders themselves are not powerful enough to provide acceptable performance? Despite a few flaws here and there, the GeForce FX 5200 is the card to buy if you?re in the market for a sub-$100 graphics card. As we have seen, it can run the latest games at 1024x768 to 1280x1024 with respectable frame-rates, and can even provide enough headroom for some enhanced image quality settings. Add to that the possibility of stealing even more performance through overclocked core and memory frequencies and you have yourself an incredible bargain for roughly $75. For the gaming enthusiast who finds themselves on a strict budget, we find it hard to do much better than the GeForce FX 5200.
Originally posted by: Mingon
So the poor performance of the card is a "good achievment" when you take into account that its a POS ?!
Its a good acheivment when it is being compared to more expensive cards yes, its a budget card remember.
Digit life have their monthly round-up for july up. Have a read the fx5200 250/400 can produce playable game rates* at 1024x768 on most games and is comparable to a ati 9000 (non pro). So how does that make it a 'POS' ? its a budget card that can play games albeit without the full details turned up at moderate frame rates so to me it fulfills its brief.
*where playable is more than 25fps - most casual gamers suggest this as playable, Personally I prefer 60 fps min.
25 fps? I wont even play Tetris at 25 fps. If youre going to use the price argument, a Ti 4200 can be bought for around the same price that will molest a 5200. You could also get a retail 8500 or gf3 ti 500 all of which will easily outperform a 5200. So yes budget or no IMO its a POS. Lackluster features lackluster performance etc etc.
Originally posted by: nick1985
my friend has a ti200, and he went out and bought a 5200. opinions?
Originally posted by: Mingon
well as I said most casual gamers say 25fps is ok, (but not for me). In the UK a ti4200 is nowhere near as cheap as a 5200, 8500 are very rare (9100 are available but lower clocked) and the ti500 gf3 is still quite expensive unless you buy secondhand. So for the majority of people the 5200 is Ok, which is why Nvidia have made a fortune with it.
As for lacklustre features you are talking rubbish, their is no card which supports directx9 in the price range >.< This will lead programmers to code for dx9 nowing full well that it is available for the lowest common denominator.
It is not as you put it a POS for the price with the features it has their is nothing else available BRAND NEW.