GeForce 5200 FX

[coolkid]

I have a 128 MB GeForce 5200 FX, and i have heard that Geforce grafix cards (expesaly FX) wont waork with 32-bit rendering becouse of soo many cuts that have been made with them.
i also herd that valve has fixed this, and are using 24- bit rendering. the problem is i have herd soo many different stries that i don't know what to beleive. if anyone has any help it would be apreceated.

 

[Yellonet]

Check some sites that test hardware e.g. www.tomshardware.com for testresult with various games.

What I do know is that the 5200 is a low-end card, thus it won't run HL2 very well, at least not on higher detail settings.

 

[TripleB-SM-]

Hey Coolkid,

Here's what I've basically discovered with my graphics card:

I just upgraded my pc to a p4 3.0c ghz w/ a gig of PC3200 DDR and a GeForce FX 5700 LE (256 meg card). I had a Geforce 4 TI4200 before, and I knew that wouldn't make the cut with Doom 3 or HL2 so I decided to get a new one, thus the FX card.

On Source, I get about 60 to 70 fps running 1024x768 with no AA and Anti Scoptric Filtering. I would assume I'm going to get the same performance with HL2. However, it's not very pretty, you get a lot of image splits (you can see the graphics actually split on your screen when you move around). So, when I up the AA to 4x and the Antiscoptric to 4x, I drop to 40 fps. This is still playable, but very disappointing, because this card is... well, not the worst, but not the best (I refuse to spend over 250 dollars on a graphics card, anything more is a waste of money).

So the moral of the story here is is that I've loved NVidia since day one. However, VALVe and all their supreme knowledge decided to build the game around ATI's graphics technology. EVERY ATI Card outperforms a comparable NVidia card.

So the moral of the story is, is if you plan on running HL2 with your 5200, your never going to get the performance you want. If you want OK performance and get the best bang for your buck, go to Best Buy and pick yourself up a middle of the road ATI card and it'll be worth every penny when you fire up HL2 or source.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

TripleB why didn't you purchase a 9800 Pro 128mb then?

 

[TripleB-SM-]

Because when I purchased the card I didn't do enough research on HL2 to understand that ATI cards perform better. And, I got a smokin' deal on it. 80 bucks for the card from a friend who wanted the new ATI for 550 bucks.

In either case, the new NVidia display drivers should help us all out with the AA and Antiscoptric filtering - the tests I've seen have been quite promising.

 

[dawdler]

I have a 128 MB GeForce 5200 FX, and i have heard that Geforce grafix cards (expesaly FX) wont waork with 32-bit rendering becouse of soo many cuts that have been made with them.
i also herd that valve has fixed this, and are using 24- bit rendering. the problem is i have herd soo many different stries that i don't know what to beleive. if anyone has any help it would be apreceated.

Eh? That doesnt make much sense... 16/24/32 bit rendering (ATI does 24, Nvidia does 16/32) is just a fancy way of saying some techno mumbo jumbo that doesnt really mean anything for the end user unless you are a feature perfectionist. Your 5200 will look roughly the same as the 6800 or X800 if you set them to max settings (not counting any driver bugs)... But of course, it wont do it at acceptable speeds (probably negative fps, lol!).

So the answer is: No your graphics card is not fast enough to run at 32 bits precision, but in that specific area you wont loose much, since your card cant run the features that use high precision anyway (for example HDR ligthing). You card should still run it just fine at low-medium settings.

 

[coolkid]

new card

i have decided to get a new ati card, for a resonable price. i think i want the radeon 9600 xt 128Mb, any suggestions

 

[bosox188]

Yes the 9600xt is a good card, it will run it pretty well. However the 9800 pro you can get for about $190 now, and it would definitely worth it if you saved a little more and got that. It will run HL2 at about max settings, get it.

 

[Gunsnroses]

My 5900xt runs CS:S on full settings, AA and AF at max, on 1024 res. At a steady 45 fps. No problems. No image problems ethier.

On a second note, my Ti4200 also runs CS:S at 1024 with no AA or AF, and rest on max.
Still looks decent, still get decent FPS.

As for the 5700, You should have bought 9800, or 5900xt. Would have cost you like 3$ more, and performace boost is a crap load.

I suggest you buy the 5900xt, the 9800 runs Hl2 better sure, but ATI is the spawn of satan. :flame:

 

[bosox188]

My 5900xt runs CS:S on full settings, AA and AF at max, on 1024 res. At a steady 45 fps. No problems. No image problems ethier.

On a second note, my Ti4200 also runs CS:S at 1024 with no AA or AF, and rest on max.
Still looks decent, still get decent FPS.

As for the 5700, You should have bought 9800, or 5900xt. Would have cost you like 3$ more, and performace boost is a crap load.

I suggest you buy the 5900xt, the 9800 runs Hl2 better sure, but ATI is the spawn of satan. :flame:

The 9800 pro will beat the 5900xt is about every game. Don't tell me that the 9800 pro is only good for HL2. That thing easily beats the 5900xt.

 

[Gunsnroses]

Stock 5900xt maybe.

But you can overclock the 5900 to insane speeds

Not to mention flash it to a 5950Ultra.