Does the Geforce FX 5200 suck?

[steve75382]

I'm in the market for a new graphics card since I broke my 9500 Pro. Considering I don't have much money, I'm looking for a budget card. I decided to take a look at the FX's. Since I never really cared for nVidia and have always owned ATI products, besides a Ti 200, it's new territory. Immediately I checked out the 5200's and was amazed on how low the pricing on them was at: from 80-120$. This is less than most G4 Ti4200's but with DX9, Open GL 1.4, and Pixel Shader 2.0 support. I also noticed something else, most of the 5200's I looked at didnt have a fan on it's heatsink. Is the 5200 low heat or something...? I checked out a few reviews on the 5200, it seems to be on par w/ the Ti 4200 in synthetic tests, and superior in real-world gaming. Anyway, the point of this article is that I'm wondering if anyone knows the beef on the 5200's; and if it is a viable option to consider for slightly heavy budget-gaming. Any suggestions?

 

[Socket eh?]

4200's are faster, the 5200 is an MX basically. They have no memory compression and are 2x2 texture units. Stay away from them.

 

[steve75382]

Thanks

 

[steve75382]

What would (in your opinion) be the best Ti4200 that's under 140$? Anything on the Prolink Ti4200 VIVO w/ that crazy 5800 cooling style ****nit?

Linkage: http://www.newegg.com/app/Showimage...09-03.JPG/14-108-109-04.jpg/14-108-109-01.JPG

 

[#1 Overclocker]

if you are looking at that price range, i would just get the 9500 pro for around $150, it totally destroys the 4200 (and the 4600 when all settings are turned on)
the 9500 pro is the best bung for back right now, while the nvidia cards are poor in comparison

 

[dreammmatt]

5200's suck <short and simple>

 

[Supertrucker]

5200 ultra 199 today at best buy 5200non ultra 99 today at best buy, there is a huge difference in those two cards, i dont think the 5200 non ultra was anywhere near the ti4200 in any test, but i could be wrong. there was also a 9200 128mb ati for 130 however i dont know how those stack up,

 

[TimWest]

computergate.com had Gainward FX52 Ultra for $84.95

I was looking at it yesterday....today I went and their link no longer works....So I don't now if they are out of stock....or just realized it was prized to low.....lol

You can still see it advertised if you go to the home page, and go to the New arrival Link.

 

[ssgohan434]

i noticed that too. (yesterday)

 

[NOThelagak]

wut i hear the 5200 sucks. but these are a bunch of ati freaks on this board. i got my 4600 and im happy as heck with it!

 

[Black_Paladin]

wut i hear the 5200 sucks. but these are a bunch of ati freaks on this board. i got my 4600 and im happy as heck with it!

OK, we might be ATI freaks but there are actually good reasons as to why the 5200 cards suck.

First of all, I'm surprised why nobody brought this up but the 5200 cards have inferior image quality to the ti4200-4600 cards.

A detailed explanation on how and why this is can be found here:

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDQ0

If you read this review, you can see that the FX 5200 cards do have some serious issues at the moment and it really remains to be seen if all of these issues can be resolved with driver updates.

If you noticed, (again in the review I linked to) once the FX cards are forced to use the "application" mode settings which makes these cards' image quality the same as the ti4200-4600 cards, there really isn't much of a difference between the FX cards and the ti4200-4600 cards in terms of performance.

As a result, the verdict, at least for the moment being is to stay away from these cards. All the cards in the FX family have serious problems and these problems might never be solved.

nVidia released these cards to the market because they had to release something to compete with ATI but I think the "good" cards from nVidia will come only after they release the NV35.

EDIT: As a note, this thread should have been posted in the nVidia section of the graphics cards forum. You can see this section if you just look on top all the threads on a page. Sorry about the nag here but just trying to keep the forums tidy here. Please post in the appropiate section from now on or our mod Cw will have to move all this stuff himself

 

[NewbiePerson]

where did you find a radeon 9500 pro for $150?
the cheapest i've seen is $165 at oc system and their rating isn't that great..

 

[Black_Paladin]

where did you find a radeon 9500 pro for $150?
the cheapest i've seen is $165 at oc system and their rating isn't that great..

Yeah, the 9500 pros are around $170-180 if you are looking to buy one from a reputable online shop such as Newegg or Googlegear.

 

[NewbiePerson]

just bought me a radeon 9500 pro
i've heard to many good things about them not to.
besides ill be getting a considerable boost from my gf3 ti200 which i paid about the same for the 9500
I couldn't resist any longer, i wana play splinter cell with aa
those are some nice graphics. Right now with no aa and no af i get about 15-25 fps on that game average.. the settings in game are 1024*768 and settings on medium.

 

[12si]

You take a FX5200, put it under your shoes, and have a stomping fest!!!
Btw, w/o AA/AF on SC, you should be getting 30+ fps on 9500pro. 15~25 fps are what you should be getting with 4xAA and 16xAF

 

[SpliT71]

omg #1 overclocker, i saw your avatar on this rate your buddy site lmao shes hot!!

 

[skid]

Yeah it sucks, man.

 

[NOThelagak]

omg #1 overclocker, i saw your avatar on this rate your buddy site lmao shes hot!!

i want that gurl sooooooo bad!!!!!! lol

 

[MetalStorm]

nice avatar #1 overclocker! but anyway, Why not go for the radeon 9600? that is meant to be quite cheap isnt it? and can OC very well from what I have heard...

 

[RideGuy]

OK, we might be ATI freaks but there are actually good reasons as to why the 5200 cards suck.

First of all, I'm surprised why nobody brought this up but the 5200 cards have inferior image quality to the ti4200-4600 cards.

A detailed explanation on how and why this is can be found here:

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDQ0

If you read this review, you can see that the FX 5200 cards do have some serious issues at the moment and it really remains to be seen if all of these issues can be resolved with driver updates.

If you noticed, (again in the review I linked to) once the FX cards are forced to use the "application" mode settings which makes these cards' image quality the same as the ti4200-4600 cards, there really isn't much of a difference between the FX cards and the ti4200-4600 cards in terms of performance.

As a result, the verdict, at least for the moment being is to stay away from these cards. All the cards in the FX family have serious problems and these problems might never be solved.

nVidia released these cards to the market because they had to release something to compete with ATI but I think the "good" cards from nVidia will come only after they release the NV35.

EDIT: As a note, this thread should have been posted in the nVidia section of the graphics cards forum. You can see this section if you just look on top all the threads on a page. Sorry about the nag here but just trying to keep the forums tidy here. Please post in the appropiate section from now on or our mod Cw will have to move all this stuff himself

The FX5200 is basically the same at the MX cards so of course it will be inferior to the Ti4200-Ti4600.

When looking at both ATI and nVidia, both have pros and cons. I am a guy who plays first person shooters online only. I always turn off all the effects that as I understand to be ATIs strong point. Without the added effects I believe that the Ti's can squeeze out more frames per second than the ATI's, for the same money.

I plan to buy a new card very shortly, and it will probably be one of the Ti4200s build on underclocked Ti4400/Ti4600 chipset.