FX5200 256MB worth it ? or a lame card with loads of mem

[BigBirdZ28]

how good is having 256 MB ?

would you be better off with an FX5600 128MB or an FX5200 256MB ?

& why please ?

[RamonGTP]

My vote goes for lame card with loads of memory. I'd much rather have the 5600... However i'd personally opt for a 5700 series or a 9600 Pro/XT

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Definitley the former, as suggested the best bang for buck video card ATM is the R9600 XT with the FX5700 closely behind but lacking (as do all FX's) Direct X 9 hardware 'punch'

--Jakk:t

[PacNW CE]

256 MB of memory on a 5200 is like having a supercharger on a Geo Metro....

It reeks of "scam" and frankly irritates me. Nvidia should have it in their contract that board manufacturers can't exceed certian memory limits with each card itteration. Ultimately, Nvidia gets the blame for having a card with it's chipset avalible that is a waste of space.

[Rugor]

On a card like that 256MB is actually more likely to hurt than help. In order to get that much RAM they normally go for slower RAM than the standard cards so since most games are more bandwidth limited than framebuffer limited you get a card that runs slower.

So you pay more for a card that's slower than the standard. Good choice: Not.

[Jagman2]

In comparing a 128MB and 256MB I would think the speed would be more important than the RAM.

I think the FX5900 XT is going for a little over $100 and I believe the FX5200 256MB is going for about $80. Check out the effective processing speed and clock speed on the 2 cards you are looking at. You will find the FX 5900 XT has a faster clock and processing speed, and I don't think running a card with higher RAM but slower speeds (FX5200) will perfom better than a 128MB RAM at faster speeds (FX5900)

[Rugor]

The FX5900 is running around U$200 not U$100, and there are a few more things than just GPU speed when comparing the two cards. The 5900 has more pipes, more TMUs per pipe, bandwidth compression the 5200 lacks, and a 256-bit memory bus. The two cards are in no way comparable.

However, all else being equal, the FX5200 128MB is normally a better choice than the FX5200 256MB. It will either be cheaper, or come with faster RAM than the 256MB model, due to simple economics. You're buying twice as much RAM, you either pay more for it, or you get cheaper stuff which runs slower.

Also, since the FX5200 lacks the compression technology of the other FX models it's more susceptible to bandwidth limitations than the other cards, so slower RAM is going to cause a bigger performance hit.

[Ankun]

can I ask where you found a 5900 for only $100? :\ cheapest I see on pricewatch is about $170.

edit: Oh now that I look I think you meant the 5600?

[Jagman2]

Thanks Ankun and Rugor for catching my blunder. The 5900XT is not $100 and if you found it for $170, I might jump on it. Where was that at?

You guys are correct though, I did mean the 5600 for $100 and not the 5900 for $100.

[Ankun]

I was wrong too, the 5900 for $170 was non XT.