Which of these video cards is better - NVIDIA Geforce FX 5200 256MB AGP or a ATI Radeon 9600 128MB AGP?

Question

I'm not looking necessarily for game comparisons but which of these two has better specs? I don't play many games with this computer, and those I do are online such as Pogo. I do decode & burn DVD's on this machine. This machine currently has the 9600 installed and I was given the FX card recently. I want to make sure it's an actual upgrade before I swap them out.

System Specs:

Pentium 4 2.4GHZ, 768MB Ram, NEC 16X DVD Burner, 200GB Hard Disk, ATI Radeon 9600 128MB Standard Edition AGP, Windows XP Pro.

The current video card handles well but is extremely annoying when the machine is booted. On boot, the video is turned on and off repeatedly while the ATI driverset loads. This card is attached to a 17" Viewsonic LCD display via DVI. I have a Geforce 7600GS on another computer in the house and it doesn't reset the display on boot so I was thinking this was specific to ATI cards only. Updating the ATI drivers do not improve this.

Answer 1

The 9600 is actually a better card. While the review linked below is actually a comparison of the 5200FX and the 9600 PRO (a step up from your card.) The 9600 delivers almost double the performance of the 5200FX, so I think its safe to assume that the 9600 would beat the 5200FX hands down.

I know you're not into games, but to be honest, that is what graphics cards affect the most, 3d acceleration. The only other reason to get a better graphics card would be if you were a 3d graphics designer, and if you were you probably wouldn't be satisfied with such an old card. Using either card will not affect online games or DVD decoding/burning at all. If you're looking to boost your DVD decoding, invest in some RAM. If you're looking to speed up your burning, buy a new burner.

Answer 2

the answer in which you're advised to get a extra moderen card misses the point of your question. I really have and use very fortuitously both an X1600 AGP and an X1650 PCI-E. They more beneficial than blow away the NV. The FX5200 turned right into a chunk of crap at the same time as it got here out, possibly in common words overwhelmed because the worst card of its day by the S3 VirGE. those who back remember the Decelerater, I make an apology to. as some thing else of your gadget is quite dated, (S478, 865PE chipset, DDR), you received't be in a position to sport at as severe a aspect as you may want. The video card you're asking about has different limits, (DX9, MSAA isn't a lot good the following, low ROPs, restricted inner bandwidth), yet in case you drop the decision and decrease the interest sweet, you need to be in a position to play on-line quite satisfactorily. i take advantage of both one in each and every of mine on Steam and performance no actual complications. My video games on Steam contain Audiosurf, HalfLife 2, HL2 DM, lost Coast, Quake a million, 2, 3, Trackmania, Unreal tournament 3. i wish this facilitates. good luck.

Answer 3

i agree with "belson."
and by the way, the "fx" series are told to be not that good.