please help choosing a card...

[quixands]

ok, I know the opinions might split, but I need a good advice with choosing between: ALBATRON FX5200P 128MB DDR OR Gigabye ATi Radeon 9000 PRO 64MB, given that the radeon is like $5 cheaper... and if I choose the radeon should I put in another $15 and get the 128MB version(like, is it REALLY worth it)?
As you can see I want somthing good, and CHEAP, price is an issue, otherwise I'd go for much better cards... thanks for the help!

 

[Keysplayr]

Im not sure what those cards cost. What is the max you can spend. Then we can recommend the best card (In our opinions) for your money.
Keys

 

[quixands]

the radeon (64MB) costs $114 and the fx5200p costs about $118 (its not in the US... so its more expenssive)

 

[selfbuilt]

Hmmm, hard to say since most online review sites have just looked at the FX 5200 Ultra (clocked higher than the regular 5200). In non AA/AF modes, the Ultra appears to beat the Radeon 9000 Pro handily in JediKnight, slightly surpasse it in UT2003, Aquanox and Comanche4, match it in Splinter Cell, and (oddly) considerably underperform in Serious Sam. Hard to say what that relates to for the non-Ultra, but my guess is that it is probably more likely to be a bit of wash (better in some, worse in others). However, in AA/AF modes, the 5200 clearly beats the 9000 Pro.

So, put it all together, and I would probably go with the 5200 and play around with it. Of course, I also like playing with newer technologies in general .

 

[NYHoustonman]

For that much, how about a ti4200? It outperforms both to my knowledge (5200=MX equivalent).

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
For that much, how about a ti4200? It outperforms both to my knowledge (5200=MX equivalent).

 

[selfbuilt]

Quixands mentioned it wasn't in US dollars ... my guess is Canadian given the relative exchange rate. Unfortunately, 128MB Ti4200s still cost at least $190 CDN or so around here.

I still think the FX 5200 would be a better gamble over the 9000 Pro at the same price (I say that because I don't know how well a non-Ultra will really do). Of course, if you could get a Radeon 8500LE/9100 at the same price (typically about $125 around here, but you might be able to find it for less) that could be a different story. The AA/AF benefit of the 5200 may not be too useful in real life, so the 8500/9100 could be a better entry level card if the price were the same.

 

[quixands]

ok, what if I also consider the Sapphire Radeon 9100 Atlantis 128MB DDR, would it make a difference, or the first two still lead?

 

[selfbuilt]

I suspect the 9100Pro will outperform a Fx5200 non-Ultra at stock settings without AA/AF. However, the 5200 should outperform with AA/AF enabled ... but, realistically, how likely are you to use those features given the performance hit on current games? Same goes for the DirectX9 ... nice to have for the future, but is this card going to be decent enough to run future games in the first place?

I guess it comes down to this: if you want to play older and current games reasonably well on a stable, mature platform, go for the 9100Pro. If you want to take a chance on tweaking new technology (by overclocking, by trying newer drivers as they keep coming out, etc.) in the hopes of outperforming the tried and true, go for the Fx5200.

Personally, I would probably go for the Fx5200 just to play around with on one my kids systems (both GeF2 Ti ... I run a Radeon 9500 Pro on mine and wouldn't change it . But without more hard data on it, I can't honestly say I'd recommend the Fx5200 over the 9100Pro to someone who just wants to play games reasonably well and not worry about constant tweaking.

At this point, there's no clear knock-out punch to simplify your decision. I'd say go with whichever strategy fits your personality and realistic gaming needs ... and then not worry about it anymore.

Hope you enjoy whichever one you get!

 

[quixands]

first of all I want to thank you guys for all the info (special thanx to selfbuilt). Now, I did some more investigation, and I read your recomendations, and I want to 'upgrade' my query... OK, I also found out now that I can get the PROLINK GeForce 4 Ti 4200 AGP-8X - 64MB DDR for like $10 U.S.D more (than the radeon 9000pro 128MB). A few points I ask you to consider:
1. the radeon 9100 is ATLANTIS and NOT 'pro' (if it makes a difference...)
2. I want to use the card for better game performance (I have now GF2 mx 440), as well as all around improved work with my windows XP pro. I'm not a heavy gamer, but when I do play, I want things to run smoothly. (games like splinter-cell or freelancer etc.)
3. I'd rather not overclock, I think I have less time these days to play around with my rig, so I want to put the sucker in, and other than once in a while update drivers, then do nothing...
4. probably doesn't matter, but my rig: axp 1800+, 256mb ddr, 60gb 7200 rpm maxtor, 60gb 7200rpm IBM deskstar, Gigabyte mb...

by the way, the only possible cards, are the ones I mentioned, I know some others might be better, but those are the only ones within reach... thanks again guys!

 

[selfbuilt]

Actually, I don't think the 9100 comes in pro/nonpro flavours ... it's basically just an 8500LE (sorry for messing that up last night). It's a good card anyway you slice it.

But the GeF4 Ti4200 for only $10 more would be a better buy. The 9100 is basically a GeForce3 Ti500 equivalent - the GeForce4Ti is a much better card. It's become one of the main staples of modern systems ... even though it only as 64MB, it will definitely outperform a 128MB 9100. I would go that for that in a flash (and you could always overclock it in the future, if you wanted).

As for you system specs, it's true it doesn't matter much at the low end of graphics cards ... but as you go up in quality (e.g. GeF4), it matters because older systems won't see as much of a benefit. However, modern processors like the XP+ series do show considerable gains with better cards, so you will definitely enjoy the Ti4200.

You might want to consider another 256MB DDR for the system, given that prices are at an all time low and most games insist on 256MB as a mininum these days. That will benefit you considerably in all your apps.

 

[firemoth12]

Originally posted by: quixands

1. the radeon 9100 is ATLANTIS and NOT 'pro' (if it makes a difference...)

Actually there is no such thing as a 9100 Pro. The 9100 is a renamed 8500. They did that because the 8500 outperformed the 9000 and they wanted to keep their naming scheme not confusing.