5200 about the same as 5600?

[@sd]

yup we know FX series cant win the Radeon 9800xt in anyway, i dont care about the drivers cheat, the only things i dont suggest ATI cards, coz lots of game cant be played out of the box i hate to wait for new driver or new game patch to be able to play the game, thats the only reason actually

[Dux]

Hi All.

Not sure what you were all just talking about then but it seems people get very defensive over their graphics cards.

Anyways, I have an 5200 which came with my machine. Are you saying that the 5200 does not work with FFXI? Is its performance so bad that FFXI is unpalayble?

What is it about the 5200 that makes it so unusuitable?

[mastaflex2002]

radeon 9800 128 reg vs geforcefx5950

I am ordering a pc from costco.com and I have the choice between the regular ati radeon 128mb 9800 or the best geforce 4 fx5950 256mb. Money is not an issue which one should I get that will run final fantasy better. If they had the 9800 xt id prob go with that but since they dont I am thinking the fx5950 will be better but conisder im looking which of these cards will strictly run FFXI BETTER.

[The Heretic]

Speaking of benchmark cheating

Both ATi AND Nvidia cheated

So dont say that one is any better than the other morally

5600 is cheap. Pure and simple. If thats what fits his budget, then thats that, dont suggest cards that dont fall into peoples criteria.

Oh and 5950 vs 9800xt? They would both run flawlessly. 9800xt is the better card though, by a long shot

[@sd]

Originally posted by Dux
What is it about the 5200 that makes it so unusuitable?

well check out this page then you know what im saying...

http://www.nvidia.com/page/fx_desktop.html

look at what features your are missing in a FX series when you buy 5200

[Vairu]

he said a 9800 Pro not XT, although XT is supposively better. If money isn't the issue i'd tell them to hold back the video card and order a 9800XT separately then install it yourself. Otherwise, go for the 5950, it got some good reviews in PCGamer and stuff. Check out tom's hardware to verify:

http://www.tomshardware.com

fx 5950

fx 5950 compared to other cards

some framerate tests

[Dux]

Originally posted by @sd


well check out this page then you know what im saying...

http://www.nvidia.com/page/fx_desktop.html

look at what features your are missing in a FX series when you buy 5200

Hi.

Yeah I took a look before but it doesn't actually mean anything to me. I have no understand of what it means to not have those missing features.

To me all that page means is that there are no X's on the 5200 and there are on the others. So what does it actually all mean?

I can deduce it will be slower without them. But how important is that reduced speed or graphical resolution?

Cheers

[@sd]

well the compare features page cant tell you which card is faster , just take it as buying a FX series card without the FX series features is kinda lame, dont you think that Nvidia is trying to cheat on those ppl that has no knowledge for this stuff ? im not a uber guru for all this , i just read & i do play with some benchmark & so to check it out, if im not wrong the FX5200 cant even compare with a Geforce3..

[Omena]

Originally posted by Dux


Hi.

Yeah I took a look before but it doesn't actually mean anything to me. I have no understand of what it means to not have those missing features.

To me all that page means is that there are no X's on the 5200 and there are on the others. So what does it actually all mean?

I can deduce it will be slower without them. But how important is that reduced speed or graphical resolution?

Cheers

If the FX 5200 is anything like the older MX cards your performance will be terrible. I myself have an old Gf3 Ti200 (but I'm soon getting a Hercules 3D Prophet Radeon 9800 128 Mt AGP) and my other specs aren't that great either. I have seen people with superior specs, but using a Gf4 MX, score much, much lower than me in the benchmark. It's kinda odd that NVIDIA makes newer cards that are inferior to their older cards, but are more expensive.

[Siber]

Ok, he didn't even say 9800 pro, he just said 9800. And if you're wondering which one will run FFXI better, it is more than likely the 5950. You guys need to remember that FFXI is DirectX 8.1, not 9.0a. Also! the GeForce4 MX line is the equivalent to the GeForce2 line. It was just a marketing scheme by NVidia to try and sell more cards to the poorer people, instead of pushing their GeForce3s. Now for benchmarks, NVidia does extremely well in high-poly, no FSAA situations. That means it just whomps ATI in UT2k3 and RtCW: ET. Do you know why? Because they run on the old Quake 3 engine that NVidia always, and I mean ALWAYS dominated. Another thing 'bout NVidia's two newest cards, they have a code translator built into them in order to make it easier for the GPU to understand what is going on and wut it needs to do. This prohibits full speed and efficiency, but it does make cards better haha. Yes, the XT cards have a higher GPU speed, but they have a lower memory speed. Not much changed when making the XT cards, but NVidia attempted to make several changes to the 5700 and 5950. They changed something (don't remember what haha) to NV30 i think it was, or 35 lol who knows?. They increased many of the overall specs also. So don't go bashing NVidia w/o doing anythign to ATI. NVidia tried to rectify their mistakes w/ the 5700 and the 5950. But yes, the 5700 and the 5950 still do cut corners to get it's performance. In a Splinter Cell benchmark, Tom Fisher was between a lattice fence and a wall. This was a great oppurtunity to show off shadows, but unfortunately the NVidia cards neither drew his shadow nor the lattice's shadow. But there are also things wrong w/ the ATI cards that many NVidia fans will bring up. So eh, I hope this somehow helped

[broberts]

256 MB FX 5600

My vote is for the FX 5600...i have the 256MB DDR FX 5600 from assylum..retailing still for i believe $249.99....cant beat it...everything so smooth....the ffxi benchmark scored 4600+

[broberts]

256 MB FX 5600

My vote is for the FX 5600...i have the 256MB DDR FX 5600 from assylum..retailing still for i believe $249.99....cant beat it...everything so smooth....the ffxi benchmark scored 4600+

[Dux]

Hi.

Well I got my copy of FFXI installed finally with my 5200 graphics card. I stuck all the detail up to maximum and ran it. (I had the most bang up to date drivers from nvidia and M$)

I must say I didn't notice any particular problems with it. I did notice that from certain camera angles you could see the thin line between one texture to the next, but that was only when Healing as the screen stopped moving and it didn't happen all the time.

The resolution was the maximum selectable from the config screen (1280x1024?) on both background and foreground with no compression or anything.

As for the speed, erm well I have nothing to compare it too so I can't say if its good or bad but it didn't strike me as particuarly slow. In fact it didn't strike me as slow at all.

Is there a symptom of a slow graphics card that you could explain to me? One thing I did notice is when I do / receive a critical hit then things slow down. However this could be a feature of the game. Is this the card slowing down?

All in all I think the 5200 is fine with FFXI. I really need to see it on a same spec machine as mine with a known "good" card to make a more objective comparison though.

Oh, and my PC is a 3Ghz P4 on the Intel ® 875P Chipset, with 1GB RAM DDR (400Mhz) and 120GbHDD with 8Mb cache. This machine is no slouch so maybe that is enough to counter the lack of functionality in the graphics card?

Oh and finally everybody keeps talking about this benchmark. What is it and where can I find it? I can post the results here if they actually mean anything (Re: NVidia rigging benchmark results)

[Vairu]

it's most likely your vid card slowing down from my knowledge, your cpu and the rest should run it perfect, about the benchmark, check these sites on our forum:

FFXI Bench 2 Score / Specs


--Benchmark Guide--