Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » OT: The FX5200
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Re: OT: The FX5200 [message #216098 is a reply to message #216034] |
Tue, 29 August 2006 12:49   |
 |
Dave Anderson
Messages: 1953
Registered: December 2004
Location: United States
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Listen to me, and listen to me good. I have this card, sure it gets the job done, but that's it. THE FX5200 SUCKS.
Although, it completely depends on what you plan to do with it. For me, I don't play games anymore, I just program, therefore I don't need a "high end" card. But if you do plan to play games, buying this card IS THE BIGGEST MISTAKE YOU WILL EVER MAKE. (Possibly...)
Like Icedog said, you can find better, for a decent price. Don't short change yourself for a piece of shit.
David Anderson
Founder, Software Consultant
DCOM Productions
Microsoft Partner (MSP)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: The FX5200 [message #216194 is a reply to message #216102] |
Tue, 29 August 2006 23:53 |
 |
Xylaquin
Messages: 261
Registered: December 2004
Location: Scotland, UK
Karma: 2
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Javaxcx wrote on Tue, 29 August 2006 21:01 |
I suggest saving up your money and getting a PCI-E board and a 6000 series card if you're on a budget. But if you're patient, save up and wait for the 8000 series coming out this November.
|
The problem is, I looked at buying an ASUS P5GV-MX mobo, which seemed perfect for me with 4 ram slots and a PCI-e x16. But i heard that it has very limited compatibility with PCI-e x16 cards (theres a list of supported cards in the manual). Searching google to see if this really was the case didn't reassure me. Only one person on Newegg said it works with some geforce cards, and i'm not taking that risk.
| Dave Anderson wrote |
I was able to run Battlefield 2 on low graphics really well. It sucked having to look at blurry textures though, which really made the game less fun.
|
I can live with that, I knew I'd have to put it way down anyway. Back when I had WinME, 8mb onboard GPU, 191mb RAM and AOL dial-up, i played ren with all settings low and i enjoyed it.
I'm not a dedicated gamer- I intend to play Renegade and HL2 on it (being the only decent PC games I have), i'll try the BF2 demo on it, see how it goes if i decide to get this. Another reason if with the dual screen etc, and it also has an s-video output- i suppose that means playing Ren on a TV 
Anyway I appreciate your feedback, although what FPS do you guys get on it when playing Ren (I plan to put 2GB of PC3200 DDR in along with this)?
[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2006 00:02] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: The FX5200 [message #216280 is a reply to message #216255] |
Wed, 30 August 2006 12:01 |
|
Xylaquin
Messages: 261
Registered: December 2004
Location: Scotland, UK
Karma: 2
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Caveman wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 17:19 |
May I recommend that you ditch the FX5200 and get the FX5500 256. There wont be a HUGE difference but its better then the 52 and its cheaper.
|
Actually the XFX FX5200 256 has better clocks speeds. Plus it has two heads for dual screens- unless i can dual screens with the onboard aswell.
That won't fit in my case. At xmas last year i got £400, so lets pretend thats my budget if I get the same money this year. If I get a new mobo, it needs an AGP/PCI-e x16 slot, and preferably 4 DDR PC3200 slots. Then I'd need to buy the ram, then i'd need to buy the GPU and maybe a new case if the new mobo doesnt fit. Plus I want to buy a sound card and MIDI keyboard, and all this in £400 won't work.
Like I've said before, I'm not looking for the latest games. I don't use my comp primarily for games- I compose music (hence the soundcard etc), browse the net, and play older games like Ren. And about BF2: low settings don't bother me- for the past 6 years I've played on onboard graphics.
The reviews of the mobo i was gonna get show that there is bad PCI-e x16 support:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/CustRatingReview.asp?Item=N82E 16813131586
[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2006 12:05] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: The FX5200 [message #216293 is a reply to message #216280] |
Wed, 30 August 2006 13:50 |
 |
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| Xylaquin wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 15:01 |
| Caveman wrote on Wed, 30 August 2006 17:19 |
May I recommend that you ditch the FX5200 and get the FX5500 256. There wont be a HUGE difference but its better then the 52 and its cheaper.
|
Actually the XFX FX5200 256 has better clocks speeds. Plus it has two heads for dual screens- unless i can dual screens with the onboard aswell.
That won't fit in my case. At xmas last year i got £400, so lets pretend thats my budget if I get the same money this year. If I get a new mobo, it needs an AGP/PCI-e x16 slot, and preferably 4 DDR PC3200 slots. Then I'd need to buy the ram, then i'd need to buy the GPU and maybe a new case if the new mobo doesnt fit. Plus I want to buy a sound card and MIDI keyboard, and all this in £400 won't work.
Like I've said before, I'm not looking for the latest games. I don't use my comp primarily for games- I compose music (hence the soundcard etc), browse the net, and play older games like Ren. And about BF2: low settings don't bother me- for the past 6 years I've played on onboard graphics.
The reviews of the mobo i was gonna get show that there is bad PCI-e x16 support:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/CustRatingReview.asp?Item=N82E 16813131586
|
Why did you even ask for feedback when you're just going to get the FX5200, anyways? You obviously seem too hard headed to realize that everybody who has/had it says it sucks and does the bare minimum. Why settle for that? ESPECIALLY since you can get graphics cards so much better than that for about the same price, why settle?
whoa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Apr 16 09:07:05 MST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01732 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
).
