GF4 Ti4200 4X 64MB vs GFFX 5200 128MB vs 9100 128MB

[TeTE]

I can buy an Asus 8420TD (GF4 Ti4200 AGP4 64MB) for 79 euros or some GFFX 5200 128MB for about 100 euros.

My cpu is a 1.3GHz Athlon with PC133.

I use the computer for videogames (FPSs and flight sims) but I can't afford a better card What would you buy?

 

[Blastman]

I would take the 4200 64MB over the 5200 128MB. The 4200 will be substantially faster.

My reasoning is as follows. I think one can get by with 64MB for a DX8 graphic cards for the vast majority of situations. You?re about like me, I?m somewhat CPU limited with my Celeron-T 1.33 and PC133 so there are a lot of situations where I will have go for frame rates rather than maximum IQ. This maybe means not running textures at the highest levels in some situations -- and that?s what can usually bog down 64MB a little in the few rare situations I?ve seen (at resolutions higher than 10x7.) For the same reason I only game at a maximum resolution of 10x7.

I would also consider a ATI 9100 128MB card as they should be under $100. Avoid the Sapphire 9100?s as unfortunately they just started manufacturing these cards on a 64bit bus and they are now 25-30% slower than the old 9100 cards.

Here?s a review of the 9100 ?

korean

All the other 9100?s pretty well perform good except the PowerColor 9100 64MB 250/183 which has memory clocked at 183MHz DDR. The PowerColor 128MB pro is clocked 250/250 ?

See darkcrow

 

[Pete]

I agree. I'd go for the 4200 and lower your texture res when nec'y, especially given the price difference. Still, depending on what games you play, you may value the 5200's extra memory over the 4200's extra speed. In that case, I'd also look for a 128MB 8500LE/9100 instead or the 5200, though.

 

[Matt84]

The GF4 Ti will be the best option but find a 128MB version.

 

[TeTE]

The cheapest 4200 with 128mb I can buy is 140 euros. I can't buy it. Initially I wanted that card, but here in Spain they are quite expensive.

The radeons. I'm not confident on ati's drivers... I'm always reading about incompatibilities. And I also use linux, what about their linux drivers? They cost around 95 euros, not so cheap.

I'm planning to buy a new computer in less than a year, so I don't want to spend a lot of money in the graphics card, as I will change it "shortly". Taking into account the prices in Spain, the ti4200 for 79 euros it's a bargain (look here http://www7.alternate.es/html/nodes/009215000.html). And having only 64mb won't be traumatic. I suppose that I'll be cpu bounded in games before 64mb bounded.

 

[nemesismk2]

I've tested all of the video cards you've mentioned, the GF4 Ti4200 is faster, followed by the R9100 and then the FX5200. My vote goes with the Ti4200 which is still a very good video card.

 

[Mem]

Yep the GF4 TI4200 is the right choice,I would also try to go with 128mb version if you can you can afford it ,especially if you intend to keep the card for quite awhile.

 

[BFG10K]

I'd take the 128 MB 9100 if it's genuine. It'll do better at high detail levels thanks to its free anisotropic and 128 MB VRAM.

 

[TeTE]

The 9100 is from PowerColor. I think it's 275/250. Are you sure it will be faster than a 4200 64mb? I don't know, may be if the game really needs 128mb... but in general I suppose the 4200 will be faster.

Anyone can say something about ati's linux drivers?

 

[Lonyo]

I believe that nVidia are better for Linux (seems to have been said in the OS forum).

If you're only going to be usin gthe card for a year, 64MB of RAM will not be an issue, as by the time you care, you'll have a new PC.