which video card are the cheap and fast and good gfx

[CyrylTheWolf]

*shakes head*

I didn't say that you were anything, Tag. I never specified.

At any rate.. I suppose my opinion is also based on the fact that I have HORRIBLE memory latency due to the fact that my onboard video is using my system memory. (Which is a REALLY shitty thing.) For ME...the FX 5200 WOULD be an upgrade since it is it's own AGP device with it's own memory and subsystems.

The GeForce 4 series was an all-around pathetic release by NVIDIA in my opinion. (And I'm an NVIDIA fan saying this.) I saw nothing but crap benchmarks for most of the models. (Some of them did quite well, however.)

I wonder if you could find me information on why a GF4 --> GFFX 5200 would be a downgrade rather than an upgrade...Tag. If Alphawolf has such an esteemed opinion of your vid card knowledge...then I'm willing to trust it. (I can only go based on what I've read in the threads.)

Let me know then. You've got my system specs. What would YOU recommend for my system in the $100-$150 range? ($200 at the very most.)

 

[Doomulation]

A simple GF4 Ti4200 with AGP is a good all-around card which is cheap nowadays *with* shader support...
it's not like you require anything more for emulation now you know...
Most games will work top-notch with it, too...perhaps not the newest half-life 2 or whatever it is, though, but still...

 

[revl8er]

the Ti4200 of the mx400 are good choices. The Fx5200 isn't a bad choice, if you have money to spend you should try the Fx5900 Ultra.

 

[flow``]

The GeForce 4 series was an all-around pathetic release by NVIDIA in my opinion. ???!?!?!

what are you smoking..

 

[vampireuk]

The ti4200 wasn't that bad a card, and to be honest I would prefer a GF4 to the 5200.

 

[Tagrineth]

*shakes head*

I didn't say that you were anything, Tag. I never specified.

You said you smelled n00bishness. To me that implies everyone is a n00b around here. ;P Be careful with blanket statements. Seriously.

At any rate.. I suppose my opinion is also based on the fact that I have HORRIBLE memory latency due to the fact that my onboard video is using my system memory. (Which is a REALLY shitty thing.) For ME...the FX 5200 WOULD be an upgrade since it is it's own AGP device with it's own memory and subsystems.

Well, the easiest upgrade you could do is to use both banks of RAM. If you have an onboard GeForce4MX, I assume you have an nForce2 board, which means you should have more than enough memory speed to make up for the graphics hit.

Don't talk to me about memory latency, btw. Look at MY specs.

The GeForce 4 series was an all-around pathetic release by NVIDIA in my opinion. (And I'm an NVIDIA fan saying this.) I saw nothing but crap benchmarks for most of the models. (Some of them did quite well, however.)

Hell no. The GeForce4Ti line was just excellent. Ti4600 is still a more than viable card today, and the Ti4200 would be the best value card ever if the Radeon 9500 Pro didn't exist.

Now, the GeForce4MX, on the other hand... meh.

I wonder if you could find me information on why a GF4 --> GFFX 5200 would be a downgrade rather than an upgrade...Tag. If Alphawolf has such an esteemed opinion of your vid card knowledge...then I'm willing to trust it. (I can only go based on what I've read in the threads.)

A GeForce4 MX to GeForce FX 5200 is a downgrade. Hop over to www.beyond3d.com and look at any 5200 review.

The ONLY case where the 5200 is better than a 4MX is in DirectX 8 shaders. DX7 straight rendering, an MX440 or 460 usually beats 5200, and in DX9 the 5200 just plain dies.

Let me know then. You've got my system specs. What would YOU recommend for my system in the $100-$150 range? ($200 at the very most.)

Easy. Radeon 9500 Pro if you can find one, if not then Radeon 9600 Pro.

 

[LazerTag]

I agree there. I just sold my old ti4200 after grabbing up a 9600 Pro at BestBuy. An excellent move on my part I think.

Faster card then my ti4200, fully DX9 compatible, I get HL2 when it's released, and I sold my old card to a buddy for a decent amount. All worked out very well.

 

[fivefeet8]

Let me know then. You've got my system specs. What would YOU recommend for my system in the $100-$150 range? ($200 at the very most.)

The geforce4ti's were far from duds. They run dx8 games very well. It's only FSAA/AF that they are really weak at.

You can find some GeforceFX 5900 non ultra's around for $200 or less nowadays. Newegg has a few $200 5900's. A few people have gotten 5900's for as little as $169. Quite a deal IMO. They can easily overclock to 5900u speeds.

Here's a few sub $200 5900's here:

http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?DEPA=1&submit=Go&description=5900

 

[gokuss4]

if you want to have pixel shading, and good gfx emulation, try a GeForce 3. that should work well enough...or you could try to go for a GeForce FX 5600

or on an ati point of view...radeon 9000 pro, or 9200 pro

according to this site http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm GeForce 3 would be best for performance. but if you want a little more features as well...go for a GeForce FX 5600

 

[Tagrineth]

ATi point of view, 9000 or 9200? Yeah, right. Any ATi fan would tell you the 9100 (or 8500 if you want to go as far back as GF3) or 9600 would be a far, far better choice than those two.

And spec lists are COMPLETELY WORTHLESS as far as performance goes. GeForce3 is NOT as fast as GeForce4Ti by a long shot, just for an example.