Geforce 3 ti200 vs. Geforce 4 MX vs. Geforce fx 5200

[kaltag]

Good evening. I'm putting together a machine that will mainly be used for programming and linux education but it would be nice to play a game or two. My question is which videocard to go for. I can get a Geforce 3 ti 200 32MB for free, A geforce 4 mx440 64MB for 20 bux, or an fx 5200 128MB for 50 bux. In all you infinate wisdom which would be the best option (deal). I want to play unreal 2k4 reasonably well and that's about it. I know none of these is gonna get 60fps at 1600x1200 with 4x fsaa but 2x fsaa and 1280x1024 @40+ fps would be nice Thanks for any feedback you can give.

P.S. the system is an xp 2500 w/512DDR

 

[t_biggs]

I had a 64 meg ti200. that thing could get over 7000 3DMarks when I overclocked the card and processor (at the time, the processor I used was a TBred A 1800+ in a NF7-S, 200mhz FSB and 8.5 multi, don't remember the GPU overclock. Not too much though, the card I had sucked at OCing.)

If it were me, I'd do the ti200 or FX 5200, probably the ti200. My uncle had a 5200 in a very comparable system to the one I had the ti200 in (in fact his was DDR, mine was SD, so his was better) and I would score over 1000 3dmarks higher than him, both at stock.

 

[sandman001]

I'd say the geforce3 would probably do the best.

 

[crull]

I would say the 5200

The Geforce 3 has Direct 8X features that the Geforce 4 Mx does not. The 5200 has DirectX 9 features that the other two cards do not have.

The 5200 has 128 Megs and the Geforce 3 only has 32.

So I say the 5200...probably slightly faster then the Geforce 3, has more memory and has some DirectX 9 features.

The 5200 will also do AA more efficiently then the Geforce 3.

 

[Gregory_WE]

There's such a thing as a GF3 Ti200 with 32MB?

 

[crull]

There's such a thing as a GF3 Ti200 with 32MB?

I was wondering that to.

 

[Panzerknacker]

I would choose between the Ti200 and GF4MX. The GF4MX is the fastest of the 3, but it has only DX7. The Ti200 had DX8.0 but I don't know how it will do with only 32 megs. The 5200 just sucks because it's a 5200 and will get a lower fps than GF4MX.

 

[johan851]

In terms of bang/buck, I don't think you can beat that ti200. DX9 features on the FX5200 don't really matter so much, because most DX9 games aren't going to look that great on any of the cards. I think the ti200 has a little more power.

 

[skidooosl]

very true! out of all those cards i would go with the ti200, why spend money for something that still will not look that great.... ( and not MUCH better than the ti200 at that) bang/buck.... well... free..... cant beat that...

 

[johan851]

My point exactly. Why spend $50 for a very slight upgrade, especially when you're not using it for gaming hardly at all?

 

[DMac]

Definately would avoid the MX440.

 

[Steven4563]

get the ti200 they only made 64meg ones too i think ?

unless it a plain old gf3

 

[Lat]

http://www.ixbt-labs.com/articles2/over2003/index.html

i would probably still take the ti200 though...good o/cer
plus, it's free. can't complain...and i definately wouldn't pay an extra 50 bucks for the 5200

 

[Oni]

Moved to where it belongs

 

[stratcatprowlin]

Well,I'll be the loner and give a big fat vote fot the MX440! The most reliable card I ever bought.Also Able to play most of the latest games just without the shaders.
No big deal.Awsome budget card.If the GF2 has 64mb's I would go with that.If it has 32,Go with the MX440.Forget the FX5200 altogether.
As you can see I got my 440 running way past MX460 speeds.If you get a good overclock,it turns this card into a very capable card.