cheap video card which one

[mercdrive]

this machine mainly burns dvd's
and some gameing
I would like to have video composite out or adapt to it

chioce so far:


APOLLO nVIDIA GeForce FX5200 Video Card, 128MB new @ new egg 52$+ ship

http://www.newegg.com/app/View...tion=14-140-017&depa=1


Ti4200 128mb Gainward Golden Sample 60$ shipped used



PNY Ti 4200 64 mb 60$shipped cables ?

I heard the 64 may be faster in gaming but what about for video

or is there something well under 100$ that helps with the mpeg coding????

I need some help been out of the new stuff since pIII's

 

[Wolfshanze]

If I had a nickel everytime somebody said "I don't want to spend a lot on a video card cuz it's really not a gaming rig... BUT I WILL DO SOME GAMING", I'd be a rich man.

Having said that, WHICH "some gaming" do you intend on doing?

If it's Solitare, get the cheapest video card you want and everything will run fine... if your "some gaming" includes Doom3 or Half Life 2, expect to pay some bucks if you want the one hour a month of gaming to perform well.

Remember folks, it's not the AMOUNT of gaming you do that determines what video card you need, it's the EXACT GAMES you will play that determine the video card!
:roll:

WHICH game(s) will you be playing, and exactly how much do you want to spend (what do you consider cheap?).

 

[WW2Planes1]

For MPEG encoding, you can get a PCI video capture card that will do mpeg encoding, there are some on newegg in the $40 area, but I can't attest to the quality of them, as I've never used them.
I can speak for the Ti4200. I've got that exact PNY card, a 64MB 8X AGP, and it's a really good card. I've played it with FarCry, HL2 and older games, and I have no complaints really. If it's a choice between a 4200 and an FX5200, I would go with the 4200. The 4200 is showing its age in newer games, but it is still a very powerful card if you don't want to enable AA/AF.
Also, The difference between the 64MB model and the 128MB model (aside from double the RAM), is that the 64MB model uses faster RAM. (3.8ns compared to 4ns, or something like that). The truth is, despite what PNY would have you believe, more RAM makes a bigger difference in performance than slightly faster RAM. I'd say you probably want to go with the 128MB model.
Hope this helps a little. you might decide gaming performance doesn't matter at all and get the 5200 anyway. You might also want to look at the lower end Radeon 9-series, the 9200, 9250, 9550, etc. I'm not sure how the performance of those stack up against the 4200, but they'll prolly be better than the 5200.

 

[mercdrive]

for me not much gaming is i dont really play the new games
and in cheap i mean 50-75
i see some for 20 but i dont think they are worth puttin in my computer

 

[2Xtreme21]

The FX5200 isn't worth putting into your computer either.

Ti4200 or 4600 if you're looking for a cheap card with some longevity. 9600pro if you want something DX9.

I wouldn't get anything in the Geforce FX series.

 

[Wolfshanze]

This might be a bit too much, but here's a
GeForce FX5700LE for $89 bucks.

Here's a eVGA GeForce FX5500 for $70 bucks.

Or if you want to try the ATI thing, here's a Radeon 9200 for $65 bucks.

Unless you're buying used, good luck getting a decently priced GeForce4... the 9800s are beyond your price range. The cards 2Xtreme21 mentioned are either going to be hard too find or simply cost more then your stated price range.

I've used GeForceFX's in several computers... for your needs they are more then fine... the FX-haters are just upset about DX9 implementation, which the OP will probably not be concerned with at all, especially at the price he's willing to pay and being mostly a non-gamer.

 

[mercdrive]

ok what about the mx4000??

 

[Wolfshanze]

Any GeForce5FX card is going to be better then a MX4000 (which is based on a gutted GeForce4).

Bottom line, you get what you pay for. If you want to cut every corner and buy a dirt-cheap $30 buck MX4000, go ahead. You'd be better off with a GeForce5FX or ATI9X00 series card, but it's your money.

 

[The_Lurker]

I'd go with one of the ATI Cards, either the Radeon 9000 (if you want to go really budget) or the Radeon 9200 (which is still well... budget). Any of the 9600's and up will cost you a good extra 50-100.

The reason I say go with ATI (and go with build by ATI, or a Sapphire card) is I found the 2d coming out of those cards are MUCH better than off of nVidia cards. Case in point. I used to run a Radeon 9500, and when I upgraded to a nVidia 6800 U, I found that the 6800 was a lot fuzzier, and I mean it's really quite bad. I then used DVI with my 6800 U and found that only after using the DVI cable with my LCD, did the same sharpness come out.

So.... ATI 2d is almost as good a DVI output. So grab an ATI card.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: The_Lurker
I'd go with one of the ATI Cards, either the Radeon 9000 (if you want to go really budget) or the Radeon 9200 (which is still well... budget). Any of the 9600's and up will cost you a good extra 50-100.

The reason I say go with ATI (and go with build by ATI, or a Sapphire card) is I found the 2d coming out of those cards are MUCH better than off of nVidia cards. Case in point. I used to run a Radeon 9500, and when I upgraded to a nVidia 6800 U, I found that the 6800 was a lot fuzzier, and I mean it's really quite bad. I then used DVI with my 6800 U and found that only after using the DVI cable with my LCD, did the same sharpness come out.

So.... ATI 2d is almost as good a DVI output. So grab an ATI card.

If you aren't using DVI with newer ATI it'll be fuzzy too.

 

[mercdrive]

think im gettin a 9200se

 

[impemonk]

get the 9550. Its somewhere like 80 bucks. Its a great card for medium gamers/etc etc.