I don't know about the Radeon 9000, 9100, or 9200. They are apparently DX8
cards, regardless of the 9xxx designation.

(Reminds me of the infamous nVidia Geforce 4 MX cards - they were
essentially updated GF2 cards, DX7 devices, rather than DX8 like the GF4
ti.)

Based on http://www.ocaddiction.com/reviews/video/fx5200vsr9200/, the FX
5200 is at least a little better than the 9200. The 5200 is also a DX9 card,
although it may not be a good choice to run DX9 games, when they appear. In
my limited experience, the nVidia hardware/drivers are less finicky than the
ATI ones. (This is just an impression, not based on wide and rigorous
testing.)

I'm still pushin' that 9600pro ($178 USD, with free shipping, at
www.newegg.com.).

Have fun.

Bob Kn.

"Mitchua" wrote in message
le.rogers.com...
"Bob Knowlden" wrote in message
...
The FX5200 is a low-end DX9 card, but it may lack enough raw power to
run
DX9 features.

The 4200 is from the previous generation; it's pretty fast (and
sometimes
overclockable to near spec 4600 performance levels). It's DX8 only.

You don't mention your CPU/RAM, so I can't guess whether your card is
entirely the limiting factor.

I have an AMD 1800+XP @ 1621MHZ, 512MB DDR, Asus A7V266-E mobo, and the
Radeon 7000 64MB OC'ed to 173MHz. I think it's a pretty good bet the
video
card is the limiting factor :-)


If you can talk yourself into wasting more cash, I'd suggest a Radeon
9500pro, if you can still find one, or a 9600. Keep your hard-earned
cash
with ATI in Canada. ;-)

The 9000 and 9200 are in my price range. Would they beat the FX5200?

I've always gone with ATI but I don't want to lay down $300 for one of
their
Radeon PRO series...yet :-)


(snip)