FX5200, should it be this bad?
 

I recently made a P4 3.0 computer, the place was out of 5700 ultras so I got
a Geforce FX5200 128mb, I figured it would still be on a par or better than
the 2 year old TI 4200 I had in the previous system.

Imagine my surprise to see GTA3(old game with a 700mhz + 16mb D3D card
recommended) running like a slide show on the new computer, I proceeded to
run the game X2-the threat in benchmark mode to compare the new computer to
the old one(athlon 2800 with the TI 4200):

Old Athlon with 4200TI - 53 frames per second
New P4 3.0 with FX 5200 - 10 FPS

I went through the normal procedure of reintalling direct x, getting new
drivers etc, totally convinced something was seriously wrong but it seems
this really is how bad the 5200 is!!, I swapped the cards and the Athlon
performed just as badly with the 5200, infact either computer with the 5200
was half as fast as my daughters Athlon 1000 with a GF2 ultra.

OK I know the 5200 is not exactly top-of-the-range and it didnt cost me a
lot, but with figures like 10 FPS it is frankly unusable, I really cant see
how Nvidia can still sell a card that is vastly slower than one they were
selling 4 years ago, hell I have a 3dFX 5500 in the cupboard upstairs that
beats it hands-down.

Anyone else have the misfortune to have owned one of these "video cards"?,
are they supposed to be this bad?

Note the use of the past-tense as I cant believe anyone who plays games more
demanding than minesweeper still uses one

"Red Activist" wrote in message
...
I recently made a P4 3.0 computer, the place was out of 5700 ultras so I
got
a Geforce FX5200 128mb, I figured it would still be on a par or better
than
the 2 year old TI 4200 I had in the previous system.

Imagine my surprise to see GTA3(old game with a 700mhz + 16mb D3D card
recommended) running like a slide show on the new computer, I proceeded to
run the game X2-the threat in benchmark mode to compare the new computer
to
the old one(athlon 2800 with the TI 4200):

Old Athlon with 4200TI - 53 frames per second
New P4 3.0 with FX 5200 - 10 FPS

I went through the normal procedure of reintalling direct x, getting new
drivers etc, totally convinced something was seriously wrong but it seems
this really is how bad the 5200 is!!, I swapped the cards and the Athlon
performed just as badly with the 5200, infact either computer with the
5200
was half as fast as my daughters Athlon 1000 with a GF2 ultra.

OK I know the 5200 is not exactly top-of-the-range and it didnt cost me a
lot, but with figures like 10 FPS it is frankly unusable, I really cant
see
how Nvidia can still sell a card that is vastly slower than one they were
selling 4 years ago, hell I have a 3dFX 5500 in the cupboard upstairs that
beats it hands-down.

Anyone else have the misfortune to have owned one of these "video cards"?,
are they supposed to be this bad?

Note the use of the past-tense as I cant believe anyone who plays games
more
demanding than minesweeper still uses one

The FX 5200 is the lowest end card NVIDIA currently makes. That was not the
case with the Ti4200. Many people need video cards to do mostly 2D and
occasionally 3D without playing a lot of games, and that is who the 5200 is
for.

I have one word for the 5200.....crapola!!!

"PRIVATE1964" wrote in message
...
I have one word for the 5200.....crapola!!!

....And it seems you have a 5200 with 64bit mem acess, as a regular model
with 128bit (that would cost the same! 64bit versions are simply a plague)
should outperform your gf2 and almost be on pair with a gf3.

"Red Activist" wrote in message
...
OK I know the 5200 is not exactly top-of-the-range and it didnt cost me a
lot, but with figures like 10 FPS it is frankly unusable, I really cant
see
how Nvidia can still sell a card that is vastly slower than one they were
selling 4 years ago, hell I have a 3dFX 5500 in the cupboard upstairs that
beats it hands-down.

You have learnt a very universally important lesson: Always do some
backgroud research before spending money!!! (especially if you care much
about money that is...) With the internet at your hands nowadays it should
be a piece of cake for you to get quick accurate info :D

The Ti4200 has a MUCH faster clock rate than the slowww FX5200. The 5200 is
the current entry level (slowww) card from Nvidia and is pretty much agreed
to be a waste of money for gamers.
(However, the 4200 is NOT DX9 capable, while the 5200 is.)

--
DaveW



"Red Activist" wrote in message
...
I recently made a P4 3.0 computer, the place was out of 5700 ultras so I
got
a Geforce FX5200 128mb, I figured it would still be on a par or better
than
the 2 year old TI 4200 I had in the previous system.

Imagine my surprise to see GTA3(old game with a 700mhz + 16mb D3D card
recommended) running like a slide show on the new computer, I proceeded to
run the game X2-the threat in benchmark mode to compare the new computer
to
the old one(athlon 2800 with the TI 4200):

Old Athlon with 4200TI - 53 frames per second
New P4 3.0 with FX 5200 - 10 FPS

I went through the normal procedure of reintalling direct x, getting new
drivers etc, totally convinced something was seriously wrong but it seems
this really is how bad the 5200 is!!, I swapped the cards and the Athlon
performed just as badly with the 5200, infact either computer with the
5200
was half as fast as my daughters Athlon 1000 with a GF2 ultra.

OK I know the 5200 is not exactly top-of-the-range and it didnt cost me a
lot, but with figures like 10 FPS it is frankly unusable, I really cant
see
how Nvidia can still sell a card that is vastly slower than one they were
selling 4 years ago, hell I have a 3dFX 5500 in the cupboard upstairs that
beats it hands-down.

Anyone else have the misfortune to have owned one of these "video cards"?,
are they supposed to be this bad?

Note the use of the past-tense as I cant believe anyone who plays games
more
demanding than minesweeper still uses one

Want to know why it's crapola?

Because it's deceptive in the way it is being sold.
It's very easy for someone to go into a store and see "5200" and think its
better then a card they bought a couple of years before because it's newer.
They shouldn't have to do any research to expect that it will be better. Nvidia
has done the same thing before with the Geforce 4 MX. You think your getting a
DirectX 8 card because all the other Geforce 4 cards are, but in fact your only
getting DirectX 7 which is beaten by a DirectX8 Geforce3.

Yes, the card is known for it's crappy performance do some searching.

If you spent any money on a 5200 then I feel sorry for you. You could have
taken that same money and purchased a lot more performance.
Let me guess you have a 5200?

Anyone else have the misfortune to have owned one of these "video cards"?,
are they supposed to be this bad?

Note the use of the past-tense as I cant believe anyone who plays games
more
demanding than minesweeper still uses one

They're really that bad. Friend had a 64bit MSI FX5200 installed on a dual
channel Barton XP3200+ with a gig of RAM. 3DMark01 score.....6400. The only
one worth having is the FX5200 Ultra.....which still gets it's ass kicked by
a Ti4200 of any kind. The plain 128bit FX5200's performance is barely above
the standard Radeon 9200 series, itself a bottom feeder. The lowest FX card
I'd touch is the 5700 Ultra.

"Augustus" wrote in message
news:OBkKc.43577$iw3.20604@clgrps13
Anyone else have the misfortune to have owned one of these "video
cards"?, are they supposed to be this bad?

Note the use of the past-tense as I cant believe anyone who plays games
more demanding than minesweeper still uses one

They're really that bad. Friend had a 64bit MSI FX5200 installed on a dual
channel Barton XP3200+ with a gig of RAM. 3DMark01 score.....6400.
.....

This is a tad more than my G4 MX4400 - I get around 6000-6100 on my TB
XP2200+

St.

"Red Activist" wrote in message
...
I recently made a P4 3.0 computer, the place was out of 5700 ultras so I
got
a Geforce FX5200 128mb, I figured it would still be on a par or better
than
the 2 year old TI 4200 I had in the previous system.

Imagine my surprise to see GTA3(old game with a 700mhz + 16mb D3D card
recommended) running like a slide show on the new computer, I proceeded to
run the game X2-the threat in benchmark mode to compare the new computer
to
the old one(athlon 2800 with the TI 4200):

Old Athlon with 4200TI - 53 frames per second
New P4 3.0 with FX 5200 - 10 FPS


Considering that teh FX5200 is the newer version of the GF4 MX420, what more
did you expect?

About the only difference between the GF4 MX 420 and the FX5200 is DX9
support on the FX. The FX5200 is their lowest card in their current
offerings.