• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

ATI 9550 or NVidia 6200?

AGP Ti4200 $33 shipped at Geeks.com FTW!!! 😀

Alrighty, just kidding 😀 But that's what I bought to get just a little more kick to my system (see sig)...no DirectX 9 support

Perhaps you can find some good deals on ebay...there are some nice cheap cards to bid on there...

If not, well, I think you should get the cheaper one, they are about the same performance wise: VGA Chart
 
i'd get the 9550, as it doesnt use turbocache or hypermemory crap or whatever its called (uses onboard computer memory for graphics). plus the 9550 OCs pretty darn well.
 
6200s blow chunks.

Most 9550s with decent cooling will hit close to 9600XT speeds on both core & mem.

I've owned both. No comparison.
 
Alright thanks, and they do make the 6200 without turbocache, ATI has hypermemory on their X1300, I don't know much about ATI's cards though.
 
If you get lucky, a non-TC AGP 6200 can unlock the second quad, turning it into a 6600.

Or you could skip lunch or mow another lawn and cough up for a 6600 non-gt in the first place. I don't think the price difference between a $50 9550/6200 and a $70 6600 warrants the lower performing tech if you're interested in playing any game, ever. Hell, $80 for an X800GT or $100 for a 6600GT/X1600/6800XT is well worth it in comparison.

I know the extra $50 seems like a pile of cash, but the gaming experience on the absolute bottom of the barrel hardware just isn't worth the price of admission. Does 800x600 with low quality textures and all the eye candy off with occasional dips into single digit frame rates on modern games sound good to you? Because that's what you get with a 9600 Pro level card today (aka X300SE, X600). On-board video (X200, 6150) isn't that far behind.

Unless you're mostly playing Directx 7 games from 2001, in which case definitely go for a ti4200 from the geeks for $33. It'll be performance comprable to a 9600 Pro or overclocked 9550, but save you another 10 bucks.



 
Originally posted by: v8envy
If you get lucky, a non-TC AGP 6200 can unlock the second quad, turning it into a 6600.

Or you could skip lunch or mow another lawn and cough up for a 6600 non-gt in the first place. I don't think the price difference between a $50 9550/6200 and a $70 6600 warrants the lower performing tech if you're interested in playing any game, ever. Hell, $80 for an X800GT or $100 for a 6600GT/X1600/6800XT is well worth it in comparison.

I know the extra $50 seems like a pile of cash, but the gaming experience on the absolute bottom of the barrel hardware just isn't worth the price of admission. Does 800x600 with low quality textures and all the eye candy off with occasional dips into single digit frame rates on modern games sound good to you? Because that's what you get with a 9600 Pro level card today (aka X300SE, X600). On-board video (X200, 6150) isn't that far behind.

Unless you're mostly playing Directx 7 games from 2001, in which case definitely go for a ti4200 from the geeks for $33. It'll be performance comprable to a 9600 Pro or overclocked 9550, but save you another 10 bucks.
Click to expand...

It's not my computer actually, it's a friend's computer, I spent almost $400 on my video card actually.
 
I had the 9550 for a little while, was surprised at how well it ran. Easy to unlock with ATITool, overclocks to well beyond 9600 Pro speeds. If I had to guess, though, it was about 1/3 as powerful as my current 6800NU, meaning halo PC at 1280x1024 with medium textures and particles would be pretty much its limit. also, running counter-strike:source, I could get DX9 quality visuals, but once the firefights started getting more people, the card would choke pretty badly. I eventually had to turn it down to the point where the graphics were hardly better than what I was playing with on my old MX420.
 
You're dreaming if you think any 6200s beyond the first batch will unlock, since only the very early ones were made with the nv43 core (6600). They have been made using the nv44 (6200) core for a very long time.
 
Originally posted by: LW07
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102666
If your friend can afford it and has an AGP slot, then I would get this X1600pro.
Click to expand...

I agree. If he has asipirations to do any form of gaming beyond starcraft, avoid a 6200/9550. A 1600XT is a great card for the money, and is definitely going to run a whole lot better in vista if he ever upgrades. Right now buying a 9550/6200 is like buying a part that was bottom of the line 2 years ago.
 
Originally posted by: dug777
You're dreaming if you think any 6200s beyond the first batch will unlock, since only the very early ones were made with the nv43 core (6600). They have been made using the nv44 (6200) core for a very long time.
Click to expand...

Guess CompUsa still has cards from the early batches, then, at least in Atlanta. Someone I know there just got one of these darling things (by PNY) and it unlocked.

Of course, he spent more on it than a 6600GT from the egg, but that's a whole different story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top