Fx 5200 Good Enough?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-24-2003, 02:38 AM
Virtualbody1234

Quote:

Originally posted by raiserblade2003@23 November 2003 - 20:16
thanx pirate. after looking at some reviews and benchmark i was a little bit scared to get the 5200 but now htat u said that...but i have got 3 more deals from pricewatch. they are all about the same price (5200 is 8 dollars more)

Ati radeon 9000 pro 64mb ddr (dx 8.1)
ati radeon 9100 pro 64mb ddr (dx 8.1)
ati radeon 9200se 128mb ddr (dx 8.1)
fx 5200 128 mb ddr (dx 9.0)

now of those four which should i get? they are all about the same price on pricewatch.com . so now im leaning toward the 5200 cuz of the extra memory and 9.0 support. so if u had $50, which would u spend it on?

EDIT: btw, this is kazaaliterock. i got sick of the name so i change it. :D

Of those 4 I would get the fx 5200.
11-24-2003, 03:02 AM
raiserblade2003

k . thanks for all the advice. guess im going w/ the fx5200 128mb :D ....hehe so cheap...only 58 dollars w/ free shipping while at best buy its 100 ;)
11-24-2003, 03:49 AM
TheFilePirater

yay, another vote for me!
11-24-2003, 04:04 AM
raiserblade2003

Quote:

Originally posted by TheFilePirater@24 November 2003 - 03:49
yay, another vote for me!

:huh: :huh: :huh:
11-24-2003, 05:36 AM
raiserblade2003

ok i was still unsure so i did some more research and found the 9000 pro 64mb did better then the 5200 in everything. in benchmark the 5200 got around 500. while the 9000 got a bit over 8000. and most games like ut2k3 the 9000 get about 20 more fps at 1024x768....so i guess ill got w/ the 9000
11-24-2003, 07:05 AM
healimonster

i just bought a FX 5200 with 256 and tried to play a new yet to be realized game and it could handle crap. I was dealing with 5-6 frames per second. Most of this was the game is not optimized but it wasn't a very good card so i returned it.
11-24-2003, 07:08 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by healimonster@24 November 2003 - 06:05
i just bought a FX 5200 with 256 and tried to play a new yet to be realized game and it could handle crap. I was dealing with 5-6 frames per second. Most of this was the game is not optimized but it wasn't a very good card so i returned it.

it's possible the rest of your system was proving a bottleneck and holding back the card

also, what game were you trying to play?
obviously some are more graphically demanding than others...
11-24-2003, 07:31 AM
healimonster

it was horizons.

the game owns my computer... but it also owns pretty much every ones computer that has tried to play it ...

so i don't feel so bad.
11-24-2003, 02:37 PM
abu_has_the_power

wats the system requirements for horizons? remember, ur trying to play an extreme game with a moderate and low end (cheap) card. i mean, this card plays ut2k3 at 2000x something resolution perfectly. it plays max payne 2, academy, all the other games out today. every single one of them worked perfectly on my pc. and i have the 128mb version. u got the 256. lucky bastard
11-26-2003, 06:48 PM
raiserblade2003

Quote:

Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@24 November 2003 - 14:37
wats the system requirements for horizons? remember, ur trying to play an extreme game with a moderate and low end (cheap) card. i mean, this card plays ut2k3 at 2000x something resolution perfectly. it plays max payne 2, academy, all the other games out today. every single one of them worked perfectly on my pc. and i have the 128mb version. u got the 256. lucky bastard

uhhh the fx5200 play ut2k3 at 2000x somthing resolution? is it on the lowest setting? what knid of fps are u getting abu

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page