PDA

View Full Version : 6200 64 bit or 5500 128 bit?


November 2nd 05, 09:37 PM
I'm a relative noob looking to upgrade to a $xx card. I was looking at
a eVGA Geforce 6200 256-A8-N341-LX Video Card

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130233

before I read about concerns in the group about only being a 64 bit
bus. My other choice would be Albatron Geforce FX5500 FX5500Q

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814170050

Which would be a better choice? I run an Athlon 64 2800. I'm looking
mostly to improve video playback with mild gaming.

Augustus
November 3rd 05, 01:04 AM
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm a relative noob looking to upgrade to a $xx card. I was looking at
> a eVGA Geforce 6200 256-A8-N341-LX Video Card
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130233
>
> before I read about concerns in the group about only being a 64 bit
> bus. My other choice would be Albatron Geforce FX5500 FX5500Q
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814170050
>
> Which would be a better choice? I run an Athlon 64 2800. I'm looking
> mostly to improve video playback with mild gaming.

Avoid 64bit cards at all costs.

Larry Roberts
November 3rd 05, 06:23 AM
On 2 Nov 2005 12:37:20 -0800, wrote:

>I'm a relative noob looking to upgrade to a $xx card. I was looking at
>a eVGA Geforce 6200 256-A8-N341-LX Video Card
>
>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130233
>
>before I read about concerns in the group about only being a 64 bit
>bus. My other choice would be Albatron Geforce FX5500 FX5500Q
>
>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814170050
>
>Which would be a better choice? I run an Athlon 64 2800. I'm looking
>mostly to improve video playback with mild gaming.


To be honest. Unless you just don't want to use ATI, I'd go
with a 9600XT card. It will out-perform a 64-bit 6200, and any FX5500
card. You can get them at newegg starting at $80.00.

November 3rd 05, 02:20 PM
I had a nightmare with a ATI 9600 Pro I got off eBay. Spent the better
part of 3 days trying to get it to work consistantly. May have been a
bad card, may have been incompatibility with my motherboard (MSI), but
during troubleshooting I read a lot about compatibility problems with
Radeons. Left a bad taste in my mouth for them.

Andrew
November 3rd 05, 02:30 PM
On 3 Nov 2005 05:20:42 -0800, wrote:

>I had a nightmare with a ATI 9600 Pro I got off eBay. Spent the better
>part of 3 days trying to get it to work consistantly. May have been a
>bad card, may have been incompatibility with my motherboard (MSI), but
>during troubleshooting I read a lot about compatibility problems with
>Radeons. Left a bad taste in my mouth for them.

Yeah, no ATI cards work at all and everyone in this newsgroup ever has
a problem do they, *sigh*.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

November 3rd 05, 02:57 PM
I'm not saying they [ATI] don't work at all. From a technical
standpoint they're a superior product, but they do have a reputation
for more issues than a comparable Nvidia card. Given my moderate needs
I'm willing to trade off some performance for greater reliability.

Larry Roberts
November 4th 05, 06:27 AM
On 3 Nov 2005 05:20:42 -0800, wrote:

>I had a nightmare with a ATI 9600 Pro I got off eBay. Spent the better
>part of 3 days trying to get it to work consistantly. May have been a
>bad card, may have been incompatibility with my motherboard (MSI), but
>during troubleshooting I read a lot about compatibility problems with
>Radeons. Left a bad taste in my mouth for them.

I usually stick with Nvidia because most PC Scene demos
usually favor Nvidia hardware, but it really comes down to what I can
afford. I have ran a Rage Fury Maxx (Duel GPU), and a Radeon 9000
(128-bit memory), and both worked flawlessly on every system I
installed them into. I was able to afford a 6600GT AGP my last
upgrade, but I will be moving to a PCI-E system soon, and I want to
get something better than the 6600GT. While it's still a great card,
it looks as though I can get something as good, or a bit better than a
standard 6800 from ATI for less than a standard 6800.
Maybe the 6800GT will drop to $200.00, but that won't happen
anytime soon.

November 28th 05, 01:03 AM
I've spent a good part of the afternoon looking for an actual test of
the 64bit 6200 vs. any other card, but the 128 bit 6200 would be nice.
Couldn't find anything on Tom's or Anand. So everyone says the 64 bit
memory bus will kill performance, but does anyone have a link to an
actual test?

TIA

Steve

psyclopps
November 30th 05, 01:50 AM
Cant tell you and specific benchmarks, but I used to have a ATI 9600 SE (or
was it LE?) that was 64bit, it ran games good unless it was demanding with
Pixel Shaders (most new games) or if i wanted to use any AA or AF, then I
upgraded to a regular 9600 which my friend gave me for like 10 bucks cause
he didnt need it and it was 128 bit and it seemed 3x as fast at the 64 bit.
So I would assume the Nvidia versions have similar performance hits from the
limited bandwidth. Also, the 64bit vs 128bit only refers to the speed of the
memory which is extremely important for todays graphics. Highly recommend
you dish out the extra bucks and get the 128 bit version.
Daniel

" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I've spent a good part of the afternoon looking for an actual test of
> the 64bit 6200 vs. any other card, but the 128 bit 6200 would be nice.
> Couldn't find anything on Tom's or Anand. So everyone says the 64 bit
> memory bus will kill performance, but does anyone have a link to an
> actual test?
>
> TIA
>
> Steve
>