# Geforce4 Ti4200 Vs GeforceFx 5200 face Off



## Geforce (Oct 2, 2004)

On any given day you are going to a LAN party and stuck with 2 choices, which one will you pick.

Please note Fx5200 here refers to the non-ultra version.

PS: I know that you would rather go with your own arsenal but this is a Ti4200 Vs Fx5200 Face Off !!


----------



## darklord (Oct 2, 2004)

Dont you think specifying the games would be better to make a good decisions?


----------



## Prashray (Oct 2, 2004)

GeForce FX 5200.


----------



## Kl@w-24 (Oct 2, 2004)

Geforce 4 Ti 4200 128MB. I'd rather hv a top-of-the-line version of an old gfx card rather than a low-end version of a newer one (forget DX 9 support for this comparo  ).


----------



## ujjwal (Oct 2, 2004)

Ti4200

Agree with klaw ...


----------



## freshseasons (Oct 2, 2004)

Ti 4200.....man where is the comparison....you are talking about Cream card and comparing it too some stupid card which cannot even handle the features it has..Even if you had given Geforce 5200 Ultra( personally i own 5700 Ultra ) still my vote goes for ti4200


----------



## techno_funky (Oct 2, 2004)

FX 5200 supports pixel shaders 2.0+ and Dirext x 9 +


----------



## [flAsh] (Oct 2, 2004)

Ti4200 gives more FPS in games than Fx5200


----------



## techno_funky (Oct 2, 2004)

hmmm 
FX 5200 
250 mhz core speed
400 mhz DDR memory clock 
memory bandwidth 10.4 GB/s
Ti4200
250 MHz core speed
500 MHz SD memory clock
memory bandwidth 8.0 GB/s


----------



## freshseasons (Oct 2, 2004)

**** said:
			
		

> hmmm
> FX 5200
> 250 mhz core speed
> 400 mhz DDR memory clock
> ...


     Hmmmm LOL    And Still Ti4200 gives lots more FPS than FX5200...another point to prove that whatever 5200 Fx claims is only on paper....


----------



## tarey_g (Oct 2, 2004)

im not saying this becoz i too own a ti4200 but This comparison is pointless. How can someone compare between a terribly weak card which doesnâ€™t have enough power to complement its own features, with a card like ti4200 which is a generation behind but yet powerful.


----------



## tarey_g (Oct 2, 2004)

from this forum on similar topic said:
			
		

> when i bought my ti i had Dx9 cards in my mind but my budget was low then, so i opted for a ti4200 which was far more powerful then 5200 and cheaper than 5700(which also lacks behind in performance when compared to ti) .I had played halo which is a Dx9 game on both the cards and i had to turn off the "eye candy" options and lower the resolution to play it decently on a FX5200(one of my friend has it) , on the other hand i played halo on my Ti4200 on full settings with all the eye candy turned on with the resolution 1024x768.It's really hard to figure out the visual difference in DX8 and Dx9 cards when u play games like halo but the Major issue is of performance the card is providing u.
> 
> 
> I repeat if u really want to experience the perks of Dx9 technology then 5200 is not a good choice, u will need at least a 5700(still weaker than my ti4200 128MB 275/550) and 5700 is more expensive than a ti4200. and if u want proof just hav a look at the link that alphaomega suggested and see the excel file abt comparison of 80 gpu's.
> ...


----------



## Geforce (Oct 3, 2004)

tarey_g said:
			
		

> im not saying this becoz i too own a ti4200 but This comparison is pointless. How can someone compare between a terribly weak card which doesnâ€™t have enough power to complement its own features, with a card like ti4200 which is a generation behind but yet powerful.



 I got your point. But in so many of the thread people are fighting over which one is better.  

I know gaming can be viewed as different by different people . . . some may want to look at a little more eye-candy albeit at some choppiness, some may want to play at better frame rates. 

 I want to say that there is not much difference in the visual effects between both the card as there is in raw speed. Take for example Doom 3. For a truly amazing experience you will need a smooth FPS as well.


----------



## gamefreak14 (Oct 3, 2004)

*FX,MX series* = Budget gamers card. Sounds good on paper (fully DX 9 compatible, pixel shaders, etc.) but in reality crawls on any game at 1024 X 768. 
*Ti* = Awesome card, at ofcourse, an awesome price. Not for the casual gamer. Is still not available at 3K   
Coming back to LAN games, u need very high fps to stay alive. So a Ti anyday.


----------



## tarey_g (Oct 3, 2004)

it is clear. everyone agrees


----------



## freshseasons (Oct 3, 2004)

gamefreak14 said:
			
		

> *FX,MX series* = Budget gamers card. Sounds good on paper (fully DX 9 compatible, pixel shaders, etc.) but in reality crawls on any game at 1024 X 768.


   He he    Thanks for Telling me my Gigabyte GEforce * FX* 5700 Ultra is a budget card.....hmmmm Agreed with you pal..Ti beats fx 5200 but FX5700 Ultra 256 DDR2.....you SERIOUS !!!!


----------



## plasmafire (Oct 3, 2004)

never get caught dead w' 5200 in ur lan


----------



## gamefreak14 (Oct 4, 2004)

freshseasons said:
			
		

> gamefreak14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I stand corrected, m8...that's supposed to be FX 5200,MX series!


----------



## AlphaOmega (Oct 4, 2004)

This topic has been done to the death.


----------

