Is this for real

[MaceHowling]

Tom's Hardware.com UT2k3 Benchmarks
3DMark2001 Benchmarks
Splinter Cell Demo Benchmarks

Am I missing something? How come the GF4 Ti4200 is on par and at times beating the FX5600?

Please enlighten me.

 

[snowairg]

Tom = Crack Smoker

 

[dragonballgtz]

The GF4 Ti4200 is just as good as the FX5600 without AA & AF on. But once AA & AF are turned on. It becomes a different story.

 

[MaceHowling]

Originally posted by: dragonballgtz
The GF4 Ti4200 is just as good as the FX5600 without AA & AF on. But once AA & AF are turned on. It becomes a different story.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[dragonballgtz]

No problem. Also welcome to the Anandtech Forums.

 

[stardust]

What you should look at is the GeforceFX 5600ULTRA (revision2) for accurate and GF4 beating benchies.

 

[modedepe]

Yeah the fx5600 non ultra is a very slow card. Here's a benchmark of one. Even with aa/af on isn't that much faster than a ti4200. They just don't have the power. The only fx5600 that's any good in my opinion is the fx5600 ultra rev 2, which is too costsly (around $200). If I were you I'd avoid the fx5600 line, there are better options available.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: dragonballgtz
The GF4 Ti4200 is just as good as the FX5600 without AA & AF on. But once AA & AF are turned on. It becomes a different story.

Yep. The Ti4200 is still a very good card, and it's GPU can still keep up with many modern ones. The Ti4600 is neck-and-neck with the Radeon 9500 Pro. The only problem is that it doesn't support DirectX9, and that will be a big problem once DX9 games come out.

If you plan on playing Half Life 2 and Doom3 with your next video card, get a fast one that supports DX9: Radeon 9500Pro/9600Pro/9700/9800 or GeForce FX 5600 Ultra(version 2)/FX 5800/FX5900 .

A Radeon 9700/9800 series or FX5900 would be the best choices. An FX5800 is also a good choice if you are deaf (it's very fast but very loud as well).