FX 5200 vs R9200 - And we finish...
(Page 5 of 5 )
nVidia GeForce FX 5200 vs. ATI Radeon 9200
vs 
Unreal Tournament 2003
I saved the best for last! None other than Unreal Tournament 2003 using the [H]ardOCP UT2k3 Benchmarker.
dm-antalus
Right away you can see that neither card is capable of running UT at 1280x1024 fluently, with or without AA and AF. At 1024x768, the FX5200 averages about 10 frames per second greater than the R9200, and at 800x600 the difference is almost 20. Antalus being a very intensive, outdoor map, rest assured these numbers are as bad as it gets. Comparing the two cards, the FX5200 consistently performs better than the R9200, at every resolution and AA/AF setting. Another thing I'd like to point out though, is that for both cards, playing at one resolution yields a better frame rate than one resolution down and with 2X AA and 8X AF on. This should really make you question if AA is even worth it!
Conclusion
I like to think of UT2K3 as the best test to see if a video card can run "today's, modern games." Until Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 come out, UT2K3 will remain in this position. Both the FX5200 and the R9200 can run UT2K3 at 800x600, and depending on how smooth you like to frag, 1024x768 is achievable by both cards. Although the FX5200 consistently performs better than the R9200, their performance is still very close, and probably undetectable to the eye. So which card do you buy? Well, although I personally would never use 2X AA and 8X AF with the budget cards like we have here today, the purpose of running 2X AA and 8X AF in these tests is to give some sort of deciding factor as to which card is superior. With that said, the FX5200 is hands-down, the better video card, from a performance perspective. There are other reasons though, as to why the FX5200 beats the R9200.
The FX5200 can be easily overclocked, with either a coolbits registry tweak, or a program like RivaTuner. The R9200 most likely requires a bios hack, which I still have not seen and probably will not see in the future, since there is not much of a demand for it. The FX5200 supports DX9 (but probably isn't really fast enough to run a true, DX9 game, which we have still yet to see), while the R9200 only supports DX8.1. The FX5200 (new core, but crippled) supports vertex and pixel shader versions 2.0+ like its elders, the 5600 and 5900, while the R9200 (old core, but upgraded, but not much) only supports vertex shader 1.1 and pixel shader 1.4. Since both cards cost about the same, once again, the FX5200 is the better video card, from a value perspective.
So does the R9200 ever win? Sure, I think it has better 4X AA quality, but even that is debatable as we all have different preferences. In any case, 4X AA is a joke with these cards, and renders any further AA discussion pointless. I guess if you're a fan of ATI and looking for a cheap video accelerator, the 9200 will certainly give you its money's worth, but for certain, the nVidia GeForce FX 5200 is the final winner. Remember though, these are bottom of the barrel graphics cards, so even though the FX5200 is better than the R9200, it's still not all that impressive. But for around $60, who's complaining? (Besides me?)
I would like to thank FIC again for their Radeon 9200, and give special thanks to MSI for their excellently packaged, FX5200 VTD128. There's definitely a ton of things worth going into detail with the VTD128 which I didn't, so if you have any questions feel free to shoot me an email. Otherwise, go back to the home page and find some more GooSH!™ to read or hit the OCA Forums to release some tension!
Looking to pickup a 5200 at a great price? What about a Radeon 9200? PRICEGRABBER will give you the best prices in town.
| DISCLAIMER: The content provided in this article is not warranted or guaranteed by Developer Shed, Inc. The content provided is intended for entertainment and/or educational purposes in order to introduce to the reader key ideas, concepts, and/or product reviews. As such it is incumbent upon the reader to employ real-world tactics for security and implementation of best practices. We are not liable for any negative consequences that may result from implementing any information covered in our articles or tutorials. If this is a hardware review, it is not recommended to open and/or modify your hardware. |
/ 54 
