Cheapest Card for Older Games?

[fultz]

Okay I currently have:

Intel Celeron 2.2GHz
248MB PC2700 Ram
Intel Intergrated 64MB Graphics (really only 8mb I think...)

Im going to buy another 512mb stick of ram for 760mb ram total. I was wondering what the cheapest AGP based graphics card I could get by with for the following games would be.

I want at least 60fps in Counter-Strike and Counter-Strike: Condition Zero @ 800x600x32.

Some affordable options i've come across are

ATi Radeon 9250
NVIDIA GeForce MX4000
NVIDIA GeForce FX5200

Would any of those work for 60FPS?

[Bios24]

I'm not a CS expert, but I know video cards. I'd stay away from the 5200 and the mx4000. The 9250 would probably do ok, but so would a Ti4200/4400/4800. If you want to spend a little more money get the ATI 9600 Pro/XT. Might even look for a newer-gen low-end card such as the nVidia 6200.

[R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3]

any of those cards should work but that cpu is really holding your computer back, the mx4000 isn't a slow card for those games but it is built on pretty old technology, the 5200 and most of the fx series was a failure in terms of quality settings and performance compared to the competition at the time but it really isn't an issue for old games, the 9250 is also built on pretty old technology (radeon 8500 - great card in its day)

the reasons for staying away from these cards really aren't relevant anymore

the 6200 costs a bit more but is a good choice

personally, on a budget, i would get this for $40 shipped:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814140056

EDIT: In CS I get exactly 59-60fps with my AthlonXP at 2ghz and 200fsb(PC3200) at 2.5-4-4-11 memory timings in dual channel and my 32mb GeForce2 GTS-V clocked at 200 core and 360 ddr ram (180) - faster than a regular GTS, i'm sure any of those cards would beat my gf2 gts-v to a pulp. (This is at 1280x1024x32)

[Yuriman]

That 5200 is 64bit, and probably, the 9250 is as well. If you can find a Radeon 8500 or 9100, they would blow away all of the cards you mentioned. A Geforce4 Ti would be even better.

I believe you have access to the classifieds now? For anything less than $80 or so, I wouldn't even bother looking for a "new" card. See if you cant find a used Geforce4 Ti or something.

[R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3]

i don't think the bitrate matters much although it can effect the real consideration: performance, does anyone know of a comparison chart of most cards that are on the market today? not old ones like the 8500 or gf4 ti's - which are everywhere. i'd love to see such a chart

[Yuriman]

The Radeon 9200se (64bit) is only a little more than 66% as fast as a 9200. Same with 5200.

What is affordable?

[R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3]

really? i didn't think there was that much of a difference

link? :D

[Quailane]

Any of those cards are overkill for playing that game.

Half-life was released in november of 1998, and your system and either of those cards are quite a bit superior to any tech available back then.

Remember that Half-Life was based on the original Quake technology, and Quake 3 itself is pretty old.

[fultz]

You guys don't understand. I HAVE to have a new card. I only need to be able to play counter-strike and condition zero but I need a new card. I don't want to spend too much money because im going to buy a whole new computer but I want to be able to play those two games right now.

I don't care the price to performance ratio, if it get's me 60fps in counter-strike and condition zero @ 800x600x32 with my 2.2ghz celeron and 760mb of pc2700 ram then I'll be happy.

[fultz]

So would a MX4000 work? If not what about a 9250 radeon

[bobthegamer]

i get better than that w/ a 256mb radeon 9250 PCI

so an agp form should work even better

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814121524

[LordDarik]

An MX4000 should be fine as long as it's normal Counter-Strike and not Source.

[R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3]

Any of those cards are overkill for playing that game.

absolutely right

[fultz]

Okay come to find out I only have a PCI slot and No AGP, would an MX4000 still be good enough or?

It's counter-strike 1.6 and Condition Zero (condition zero has better graphics but nothing like source)

I get around 8fps in CZ and 15 in 1.6 as of now (8mb intergrated)

[fultz]

MX4000 is 64mb by the way.

These are my options:

PNY Verto GeForce 2 MX4000 64MB DDR PCI 275MHz Core 400MHz Clock, 64-BIT
Sapphire Radeon 7000 64MB DDR PCI 166MHz Core 333MHz Memory 64-BIT
Apollo GeForce 4 MX440 64MB DDR

Which one would yield best performance?

[Quailane]

The MX440 would perform best even if it is 128-bit memory or 64-bit.

[fultz]

So does it being PCI mean it won't get me at least 60fps in cs cz and cs 1.6 or does that not matter in this case?

[Froggy]

With those cards specs, the PCI bus will not be a big enough restriction to hold them back!

[mdameron]

I played the original DoD with an ooooooooooooold 32mb nVidia card... man that thing was old. Played it flawlessly too... damned thing didn't even have a fan on it. You shouldn't have to spend more than $50 shipped for any card to play CS 1.6 at playable framerates...

[R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3]

I played the original DoD with an ooooooooooooold 32mb nVidia card... man that thing was old. Played it flawlessly too... damned thing didn't even have a fan on it. You shouldn't have to spend more than $50 shipped for any card to play CS 1.6 at playable framerates...

that's exactly what i still use, a 32mb nvidia geforce2 gts-v, i remember buying it for $54 at newegg in march of 2002, i took the fan off and slapped just a heatsink on it, still it overclocks from 175/286 to 200/360 before artifacting, i get 60 frames on CS 1.6 and TFC

[fultz]

Well the geforce 4 mx440 is only $34 shipped so I guess it's the best buy then? Thanks guys, i'll order tomorrow from newegg!