Geforce FX 99 Bux

[crip11]

I couldnt believe my eyes!!!!!!

Here It Is

 

[NFS4]

Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

 

[Sid59]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

lol

 

[chiwawa626]

How would the stripped down version compare to an older card such as a geforce 2 or 3?

 

[Kevin]

That is strikingly familiar to my Voodoo 3 3000...

 

[brunswickite]

geforce fx is suck

 

[BentValve]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

Um no its the Vega version.

 

[Mem]

What NFS4 is trying to say is that there`s quite a few models in the FX range covering all prices and performance,going from cheapest to the most expensive in this order,FX 5200,FX 5200 Ultra,FX 5600,FX 5600 Ultra,FX 5800,FX 5800 Ultra.

Looks like you`re getting the FX 5200 mixed up with the FX 5800 .

 

[Duvie]

It is likely it is the MX model of the bunch...Probably clocked lower and has lower grade memory and maybe have a few less pipelines for rendering....

All speculation...Go check Nvidia's website for the clear definition....

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: brunswickite
geforce fx is suck

You failed english didn't you?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: brunswickite
geforce fx is suck

You failed english didn't you?

No, you just don't understand the term "is suck" which was coined here a while back

 

[GTaudiophile]

I saw bench somewhere showing that the ATi Radeon 9200 spanks the FX 5200 big time, of course is not DX9 compliant.

 

[Duvie]

So basically it is like the mx models...remember the GF4 line of cards was DX8 compliant except the GF4MX card which was only DX7....I think these lower line cards are for the ppl who are not big gamers but need a bit more then the integrated chipsets.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: kevin000
That is strikingly familiar to my Voodoo 3 3000...

Since when did Voodoo3's have a DVI port?

On a side note, it is a DX9 card with performance probably somewhere in the geforce3 area.

 

[Schadenfroh]

geforcefx 5200 is like a geforce4mx with directx 9 support

 

[m1ke101]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

haha

 

[BmXStuD]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

is that like the MX of the gf4 ti's? and does that mean its better than the gf 4 tis4200 or better than the gf 4 mx460 ddr?

 

[galperi1]

Originally posted by: BmXStuD

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

is that like the MX of the gf4 ti's? and does that mean its better than the gf 4 tis4200 or better than the gf 4 mx460 ddr?

It loses to the MX 440 by ALOT. That's how "pinto" it is

 

[pillage2001]

OMG OMGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.......I"M BUYING 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: galperi1

Originally posted by: BmXStuD

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

is that like the MX of the gf4 ti's? and does that mean its better than the gf 4 tis4200 or better than the gf 4 mx460 ddr?

It loses to the MX 440 by ALOT. That's how "pinto" it is

ABSOLUTE BULLSH*T! :| :| :| Benchmarks placed the 128-bit FX 5200 **WELL** above the MX-440 and in some cases right up there with the TI4200! Try reading a few reviews and come back later.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: galperi1

Originally posted by: BmXStuD

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

is that like the MX of the gf4 ti's? and does that mean its better than the gf 4 tis4200 or better than the gf 4 mx460 ddr?

It loses to the MX 440 by ALOT. That's how "pinto" it is

ABSOLUTE BULLSH*T! :| :| :| Benchmarks placed the 128-bit FX 5200 **WELL** above the MX-440 and in some cases right up there with the TI4200! Try reading a few reviews and come back later.

Wow someone has a sensitive side.

I wouldnt get the GF4MX series anymore due to lack of DX8 and DX9 functionality. Probably in future games, it'll cripple the GF4MX whereas the FX5200 could do reasonably well. If what you say it true, and it performs on a ti4200 calibur, it'd be a great deal for $99.

 

[human2k]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: galperi1

Originally posted by: BmXStuD

Originally posted by: NFS4
Dude, that's the "Pinto version" of the FX series

is that like the MX of the gf4 ti's? and does that mean its better than the gf 4 tis4200 or better than the gf 4 mx460 ddr?

It loses to the MX 440 by ALOT. That's how "pinto" it is

ABSOLUTE BULLSH*T! :| :| :| Benchmarks placed the 128-bit FX 5200 **WELL** above the MX-440 and in some cases right up there with the TI4200! Try reading a few reviews and come back later.

THG Review of 5200/5600 Ultra.

That card for $99 is not the higher clocked "ultra" version in the benchmark, so its gonna be a bit slower. Looking at the benches the card is hardly "up there with the TI4200". Its more like a fine tuned Radeon 9000.



Cheers!:beer:

 

[bluemax]

I *did* say, "in some cases". And comparing it to a Radeon 8500/9000 is fair. I'd put the performance about equal... sometimes higher - depending on the program in question.

Beaten by an MX-440 indeed! Phseesh!

 

[galperi1]

Originally posted by: bluemax
I *did* say, "in some cases". And comparing it to a Radeon 8500/9000 is fair. I'd put the performance about equal... sometimes higher - depending on the program in question.

Beaten by an MX-440 indeed! Phseesh!

the 85$ does in fact lose out to the MX 440 in most cases. Maybe not in 3dmark03 where it can run Game 4 at an astounding 6 FPS Oh ya, the card you linked only has a 64-bit memory controller. Talk about going backwards in technology.

 

[bluemax]

*I* never linked anything, but you made a good point! The cards with 64-bit memory controller DO suck! Half the speed of the 5200 Non-Ultra is slower than an MX4-440. BUT he linked to the 128MB card which is supposed to be 128-bit. (Early reports suggest that 128-bit is *required* for 128MB cards which makes it the easiest way to make sure you get a card that performs quite decently.)