Hmm... Which one?

[LittleCaesar]

After much deliberation, I have decided to get a new video card. I'm on a very low budget, so I'm looking at something like this (http://www.newegg.com/app/Showimage.asp?image=14-133-058-02.JPG/14-133-058-01.JPG/14-133-058-03.JPG/14-133-058-04.JPG) PNY Verto MX 440. Is this a good card? I don't need it to be anything fancy, just something that will run games like Counter-strike and WarCraft III.

My system is an HP Pavilion 1.3 GHz, 256mb RAM, Windows XP Home. If this isn't a good card, what else could I get in the same price range (probably <$80)? It has to be a PCI. Any advice is much appreciated.

[RamonGTP]

Well that depends on your defination of "good." Gaming wise, I don't believe a "good" PCI card even exists. If this is something you're going to be keeping for a while, i've heard decent things about the FX 5200 PCI.

[CaptHandsome]

I'd suggest getting an ATI card...Radeon 9000 or 9200. But the FX 5200 does support DX9, if you end up playing any newer games. Hope that helps.

[RamonGTP]

If you were going mid/high end cards I would suggest the ATI... However I believe nVidia has a better low end card.

[iceblue]

i play all those games u mentioned on a lower spec'd system (/w a 64MB GeForce 4 MX440) and it's plenty but stick with a 128MB version.

[LittleCaesar]

Originally posted by RamonGTP
If you were going mid/high end cards... nVidia has a better low end card.

What exactly do you mean by high/mid/low end cards? I want at least 64mb; is that mid-range? Also, does it matter what brand I get, and if so what brand(s) do you suggest?

[tantone]

It might be easier if you provided a price range you're trying to fall within.

I had a GF3 ti200 64MB, and played around with an FX5200 128MB and it was no contest. The GF3 won every time. I would recommend against the FX5200 cards if you're into gaming--great economy card for an office environment for document imaging, etc., but falls short of any sort of gaming glory.

Go for a slightly lower end Radeon if you can, like the 9200. NewEgg has them for about $65.

[LittleCaesar]

How about this one?

Info-Tek GeXCube Radeon 9200SE 128MB (http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?DEPA=1&submit=Go&description=GeXCube%2CRadeon%2C9200SE%2CPCI)

The only thing I'm worried about is that it says it supports DX 8.1, and I already have 9.0b. Will that be a problem?

[tantone]

Having DX9 installed when running a card that may not truly support it shouldn't hurt anything. As long as you keep up with the drivers (in the case of ATI, the Catalyst drivers), you should be fine.

[killer_teddy]

Originally posted by LittleCaesar
What exactly do you mean by high/mid/low end cards?
high = good but costly
mid = not bad not expensive
low = cheap but not very good

[RamonGTP]

If you go here... http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/index.html you will clearly see the 5200 out performs the Radeon 9000. I don't know how the 9200 compares becuase I haven't been able to find too much information on it but I assume their very similar.

[Peter M]

True for AGP cards. However for use on the PCI bus, the 5200 has been clocked down quite far (to fit the PCI slot power budget, apparently). The result is that the PCI 5200 cards are a LOT slower than the AGP ones.

Best performance currently comes from the few PCI Radeon 9100 cards still around.

[LittleCaesar]

Originally posted by Peter M

Best performance currently comes from the few PCI Radeon 9100 cards still around.

Any idea where I can get one of those? Apparently Newegg doesn't have them.:(

I found a 64mb at computerhq.com (http://www.computerhq.com/hardware/reviews-id-31009.html). How much better is a 128? That $60 price tag is very tempting.

[Rugor]

Hmmmmmmm good question as to where to find a PCI Radeon9100. But do avoid the 9200SE cards if you can. ATI uses the SE suffix to indicate a cut down card with a narrower memory bus.

The non-SE cards will always out perform them.

I know Visiontek was one of the few to make a 9100 PCI so you may want to check their website for places that carry them.

[Direct1]

VisionTek Xtasy ATI Radeon 9100 Pro 64MB DDR PCI (http://www.shentech.com/vixt91ra91pr.html) -- Says $47 shipped.

Good luck! :t

[LittleCaesar]

Thanks for all the help guys!:t

[LittleCaesar]

Sorry to bother again, but I just found this 128mb version (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?kbimage=no_image.jpg&kb=y&afsrc=1&sourceid=2260&EdpNo=585202&sku=V261%2D3018+W) at TigerDirect. Would it be significantly better than the 64mb?

[Direct1]

Since it's about the same price (after rebate) you may as well get it. Can't hurt having more memory. :t

[iceblue]

i hope you realize that the 9100 only supports DirectX 8.1.

and yep, 128MB is the ideal size to get.

[Rugor]

For a PCI card that will probably rock, the only thing I wonder is whether it has a 128-bit or 64-bit memory interface. I don't know of any 64-bit models of the 9100 so I think that's probably 128 and so would be pretty solid.

Edit: just checked, Visiontek doesn't make any 64-bit 9100's.

Basically it's a good old fashioned Radeon 8500LE, and probably the best PCI card you can find overall.

[LittleCaesar]

i hope you realize that the 9100 only supports DirectX 8.1.
Does that mean it won't play DX 9 games at all, or it just won't work as well?

[Rugor]

What it means is that it doesn't support all the features of DX9 in hardware. However, all this means is that the game in question will fall back to a default DX8.1 render path when using this card. You'll lose some eye candy, and some features will have a bigger performance hit, but that's about it.

The only readily available DX9 PCI card is the FX5200, and it's going to be slower anyway. In fact in almost any game that card will run the DX8.1 path as well because it's too slow under DX9.

You'll still be able to run DX9 games and you won't be able to do any better on PCI, so go for it.

[LittleCaesar]

Sounds like I found my card. Thanks again! :t