Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

video card technical differences

Hacktarux

Hacktarux

Emulator Developer
Moderator
I'm planning to buy a new video card, i don't really care about speed but i want it to support as much features as possible with my very limited budget... I have not followed the video card market lately so forgive me for my ignorance on this domain :p

Can anyone tell me the differences between those cards:
G4 Ti 4200
GF FX 5200
GF FX 5600
Radeon 7000
Radeon 9200
Radeon 9600

Remember i don't care if it can give me some extra FPS in a game or another coz i won't use it for this but i want to know which effects i'll miss on which card, which standards are missing....

One last thing, i don't want to buy a GF4 MX as i've understood that it's basically a GFX2 MX but i'm curious, what's the difference between a GF4 MX 440 and a GF4 MX 440SE ?
 
mightyrocket

mightyrocket

Banned
The newer Radeon cards and Geforce FX cards have got better DX9 support.

The difference between the Geforce4 mx 440 and the SE version? The SE is Agp 8x and the normal one is agp 4x.
 
ScottJC

ScottJC

At your service, dood!
no, wrong, the SE one is made from cheap parts and runs slow as s**t, trust me i know, i bought one!
 
R

ra5555

N64 Newbie
Hey Hacktarux, I recommend getting a Readon 9700 non-pro. You can get it now for about $200US, and it will be only a little more expensive and a lot more faster than the Readon 9600. I don't recommend getting a FX5600 because its too expensive and it will not preform as well as the 9600.
Just check out some benchmarks and reviews around the net and you will see what I mean.

Gl :)
 
mightyrocket

mightyrocket

Banned
I'd never recommend a FX-card. The FX-cards have various problems, and the most of them (excepting the new 5900) have the bug that it turns off the fan while 3d-screensavers and the result is a cooked chip.
 
Lex

Lex

New member
LOL, i read that before and it is still funny, at least if you don't own one yourself :p
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
ra5555 said:
Hey Hacktarux, I recommend getting a Readon 9700 non-pro. You can get it now for about $200US, and it will be only a little more expensive and a lot more faster than the Readon 9600. I don't recommend getting a FX5600 because its too expensive and it will not preform as well as the 9600.
Just check out some benchmarks and reviews around the net and you will see what I mean.

Gl :)
Click to expand...
It's not necessary to get one such good card now. Most programs don't even utilize its power. The gf4ti 4200 or the comparable raedon is a good choice for a little amount of money today imo.
 
mightyrocket

mightyrocket

Banned
The FX 5200 is at the moment very cheap (E 89 here), but I think the Radeon 9600 is the best option, but you can try to get a 9500, you can overclock it to a higher speed and it's waaaay cheaper.
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
The gf fx I am told has a bug when using the screensaver (not sure, though...), plus that it's very noisy. I'd go for raedon instead of a gf fx card.
 
blight

blight

New member
aren't you guys able to answer the questions you'Re asked? he wanted to know differences not why one cards is better than another becaus you can overclock it and get 1 more FPS in a game which hacktarux won't play... also i do not think that directx compatibility is a question - gl rules and on linux there is only gl and glide anyways...
i've read that gf fx doesn't support palettized textures which is i.e. problematically for PSX graphics plugins. Also i think the only cards supporting up to 4 (?) combiner stages are gf fx and some new radeon. i don't know if the gf fx is as bad as people say or not, but if someone has problems with the fan and the card turning it off i'd suggest connecting it to a constant electricity source like +3V or something ;)
on #emulation64 someone said ati discontinued their linux drivers so if that is true i'd suggest nvidia ti to you, hack :cyclops:

my 2 cents... :sp_canada
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
mightyrocket said:
Example of someone who is too lazy to read the whole thread.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah? How so :getlost:
I was commenting a mr. mightyrocket's reply, if you didn't get that. :doh:
 
Lex

Lex

New member
Doomulation said:
The gf fx I am told has a bug when using the screensaver (not sure, though...), plus that it's very noisy. I'd go for raedon instead of a gf fx card.
Click to expand...
the newer versions are not noisy anymore and there are gf fx cards with a more silent fan
 
mightyrocket

mightyrocket

Banned
Doomulation said:
Oh yeah? How so :getlost:
I was commenting a mr. mightyrocket's reply, if you didn't get that. :doh:
Click to expand...
Okay, then it's alright. You said you weren't sure and I tought you probably heard it from someone else :D .

However, don't forget that Geforce FX-cards can overheat an older machine. Hacktarux only has got 1 ghz, and I think that CPU is too slow to handle a Geforce FX.
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
Umm yeah...
It's nice to see nvidia fixed this gf fx problem...but still the lack of this palletized textures (i think it was named so?) could be a problem...
And besides that, the newest raedons actually kicks nvidia's gf fx's ass. Meh. :baaa:
Seems like nvidia lost this war and finally will be taught a lesson.
 
blight

blight

New member
doom: i wouldn't be too sure... i've read that the fx is the first card to have a GPU which can run "real" programs, not just gl or dx... maybe it's like with p4 and athlon - code is not optimized enough/cpu is not used in the right way... however dx and gl are the main interfaces for 3d graphics and i think such a new thing like "real" programs on the gpu needs some new interface/programming language... also it has 128 bit internal floating-point size for at least colors and maybe also math (not sure)... dunno about ati's cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top