Graphic Cards Crappiest Graphic card for a long time!

V

Vij

Explorer
Today I checked out a friends system..Just ran a opengl viewport perfomance benchmark in Maya and got 1fps...And its not such an old card either..I remember even my olddddd Geforce 4 ti 4400 gave me 15fps in the same test with a worse CPU...

and the card under question is Geforce FX 5200.... even Geforce 4 MX series gives better scores I guess...

I mean what can this card do..can this play any decent games at medium settings and 800X600 even ?

Anyways just freaked out at this useless card...Rant over...
 
OOHO MAN HILAROUS!!THE WAY U WROTE DOZ THINS I JUZ CANT STOP LAUGHIN...nywayz but i feel der must b sumthin wrng wid ur frndz card as 1 of my frnd has used that and it was pretty ok.
 
I dont think...All PAs at our wrk place have this card on their sys...Also checked out another machine...n it never goes above 3 fps ...I kn these cards r not meant for prof opengl apps..but then when very old mid segment cards gv better scores its not nice to see this struggle...

How does this do in games?
 
Geforce FX series was ultimate crap....

But the last few cards were decent enough (but no match for the then king-of-the-hill, the 9800s )....like the 5950 Ultra, 5900 XT (I almost bought this card because it was cheaper compared to the 9800s and performed decently enough :P )

And wait for Chaos to see and reply here....he was some 733t comments abt the 5 series :P
 
yup, 5 series were total bollocks, the 4Ti's kicked ass, unless u counted the 5700 upwards.... but hey, that was the time ATI was ruling the graphics scene, and the 5 series didn't do much then either.
 
It makes no sense comparing an fx5200 to a 4XXXti. That is like saying a 6600 gt is way better that 7300gs. Well... duh.

And that card supported pixel shaders unlike the gf4 mx cards which meant that you could play sands of time and warrior within which was a pretty huge plus. Also, games like doom3 and far cry and nfs:mw looked better on it. So yeah, it did have its advantages.
 
^^ Lol it was worth comparing, as both were simlarly priced initially and one was a utter crap. But no Nv card can beat the fx5800 ultra dustbuster series...
 
me still run CSS on my 5200FX...with incremented clock speed of ~50..& i get ~80fps..in medium settings..:) & IMO..thats the only game i play seriously...
 
FX5200 was a piece of shit in terms of performance when compared to the geforce 4 Ti series..these cards performed far better than and ti4800 beats fx 5600 hands down
 
i once tried an FX5200..

it gave lower FPS(in NFSUG2) than my onboard 4MX :rofl:

the n00b shader units in the card are at fault i guess :P
 
he he .. i only play PES6 (:P) and it runs quite well on my fx5200 !!! even far cry and half life 2 ran quite well :|

and one thing .. run the card on old drivers to get better performence ..forceware 61.71 gives noticably better performnce than forcewrae 89.91

@ everyone ..coz it runs shders 2.0 and not shaders 1.4 like ti series .. just force shader 1.4 models and both the cards will have same performence (may be ti better) :P .. what do u expect from a card that cheap anyway :|

@ chiron .. sahi bola bhai :P
 
i used a PCX 5300 (PCIE variant of the 5200) and it gave me decent perfomance. here is what i played,



Far Cry - Medium-High settings - 1024*768

HL2 - Medium settings - 1024*768

NFS UG 2 - Medium settings - 1024*768

Max Payne 1 & 2 - Medium-High settings - 1024*768

AOE - III - Medium - 1024*768

ALL the above games were definitely playable at those settings.
 
Back
Top