• 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.

Which Video Card is better....

jimbob200521

jimbob200521

Diamond Member
I've got a friend who had a Radeon 9000 64mb and I have a FX5200 128mb Card. If my FX5200 is better than his Radeon 9000 I'm going to give it to him since he games with it more than I do. Thanks for any help 🙂
 
If the FX5200 is 128-bit, it's probably a little better than a RADEON 9000. If it's 64-bit... then you are the proud owner of probably the slowest graphics card made in the last four years.

They're both pretty awful by today's standards. Even with the 128-bit versions of both cards, you're looking at something maybe around the performance level of a GF3Ti. Maybe.

digit-life 1999-2003 roundup. Has both cards, in both 128-bit and 64-bit flavors (the RADEON 9000 is almost identical to the RADEON 9200).
 
The FX5200 is 'better' from a feature set standpoint. You can get pixel shaders with Cedega under Linux with a FX5200, and it is better from an accelerated media playback with both Linux and Window. There are open source X drivers for the 9000, however. If you don't care about Linux, benchmark both with 3dMark 2001 and see. =)

2D image quality is probably better on the 9000. 3D image quality was great on the FX series.

But yeah, you probably won't notice a performance difference between the two. We're talking barely double digit frame rates with 2003 games with those cards. 10 fps and 12 fps are a bigger difference percentage wise than you'd see comparing a 7800GT vs X1900XTX, but not really perceptable when you're comparing slideshows.




 
Originally posted by: Matthias99
If the FX5200 is 128-bit, it's probably a little better than a RADEON 9000. If it's 64-bit... then you are the proud owner of probably the slowest graphics card made in the last four years.

They're both pretty awful by today's standards. Even with the 128-bit versions of both cards, you're looking at something maybe around the performance level of a GF3Ti. Maybe.

digit-life 1999-2003 roundup. Has both cards, in both 128-bit and 64-bit flavors (the RADEON 9000 is almost identical to the RADEON 9200).
Click to expand...

Thanks for that link :thumbsup:

It looks like his 9000 is pretty close to my FX5200...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top