NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 ( Very Slow )

FX5200 is an entry level card (slow) and your
4600 was top of the line in its day (fast).

If you want to see the power, put your card in her system.
Your system is to slow to make use of the 4600's real power

Daniel


"Shaun Pudwell" wrote in message
...
My wife has a Compaq Presario 1.7Mhz with a GeForce FX 5200. Halo for the
PC runs as slow as it does on my PIII 500 with a GeForce 4 ti 4600. Does
anyone know why this is?

My wife has a Compaq Presario 1.7Mhz with a GeForce FX 5200. Halo for the
PC runs as slow as it does on my PIII 500 with a GeForce 4 ti 4600. Does
anyone know why this is?

the 5200 is no good really
your TI 4600 is MUCH faster... ideally i think the 5200 should go in your pc
and the your good card in her pc as a p3 500 would be limited by the 5200
and the 1.7ghz would be processor limited witht the 4600

alan

For the most part what you are saying is true. But if the 1.7 ghz happens
to be a Celeron, then it is not much faster than his P3, and would still be
holding the ti4600 back.

Dave


"Alan" wrote in message
...
My wife has a Compaq Presario 1.7Mhz with a GeForce FX 5200. Halo for
the
PC runs as slow as it does on my PIII 500 with a GeForce 4 ti 4600.
Does
anyone know why this is?

the 5200 is no good really
your TI 4600 is MUCH faster... ideally i think the 5200 should go in your
pc
and the your good card in her pc as a p3 500 would be limited by the 5200
and the 1.7ghz would be processor limited witht the 4600

alan

Not true.
If it was a Celeron 2, which it would be if it was running at 1.7 ghz, it
would only run approximately 10% slower than a identically clocked P4.

"DaveL" wrote in message
...
For the most part what you are saying is true. But if the 1.7 ghz happens
to be a Celeron, then it is not much faster than his P3, and would still
be
holding the ti4600 back.

Dave

I previously had a VOODOO 3 card, but had trouble with support for anything
using DirectX 8.1 or higher. My wife previously had a GF 2 card, which was
also faster than the FX 5200. I'll swap the cards over to see if that makes
a difference.



"anon" wrote in message
...
Not true.
If it was a Celeron 2, which it would be if it was running at 1.7 ghz,
it
would only run approximately 10% slower than a identically clocked P4.

"DaveL" wrote in message
...
For the most part what you are saying is true. But if the 1.7 ghz
happens
to be a Celeron, then it is not much faster than his P3, and would still
be
holding the ti4600 back.

Dave

"Shaun Pudwell" wrote in message ...
My wife has a Compaq Presario 1.7Mhz with a GeForce FX 5200. Halo for the
PC runs as slow as it does on my PIII 500 with a GeForce 4 ti 4600. Does
anyone know why this is?

wow, a nice FX5200 Non Ultra with 64-bits memory bandwidth. .. those
only can push 2,7Gb/s .... I mean that is even less as an GF2.

Aint it cute how they **** up their clients by using sub-par cards,
hell that card was sub-par already 3 years ago.

DX9, ...yeah..with 1 FPS per second. See the sparks coming from my
beautifully glowing riffle while I get shot by everybody else in UT
2004. Yeah baby!

"anon" wrote in message ...
Not true.
If it was a Celeron 2, which it would be if it was running at 1.7 ghz, it
would only run approximately 10% slower than a identically clocked P4.



I see a person posting anomymous... and being wrong to. A celeron
1,7Ghz performs like an... 1,2 Old Celeron.

Yup that is what you get with sub par parts in your pc!

Well, I've swapped the cards over, so my wife now has the ti4600 and I've
got the FX 5200. The ti4600 is working much faster than the FX 5200 on her
machine and she's very happy. Even though I've got a PIII 500, I have still
noticed how slow the FX 5200 is. Halo on my old machine is now unplayable.
Even the original Unreal seems to be slower than before!!


"Dark Avenger" wrote in message
om...
"anon" wrote in message
...
Not true.
If it was a Celeron 2, which it would be if it was running at 1.7 ghz,
it
would only run approximately 10% slower than a identically clocked P4.



I see a person posting anomymous... and being wrong to. A celeron
1,7Ghz performs like an... 1,2 Old Celeron.

Yup that is what you get with sub par parts in your pc!

You might try to find a used 4200 for your system


"Shaun Pudwell" wrote in message
...
Well, I've swapped the cards over, so my wife now has the ti4600 and I've
got the FX 5200. The ti4600 is working much faster than the FX 5200 on
her
machine and she's very happy. Even though I've got a PIII 500, I have
still
noticed how slow the FX 5200 is. Halo on my old machine is now
unplayable.
Even the original Unreal seems to be slower than before!!


"Dark Avenger" wrote in message
om...
"anon" wrote in message
...
Not true.
If it was a Celeron 2, which it would be if it was running at 1.7
ghz,
it
would only run approximately 10% slower than a identically clocked
P4.



I see a person posting anomymous... and being wrong to. A celeron
1,7Ghz performs like an... 1,2 Old Celeron.

Yup that is what you get with sub par parts in your pc!

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 16:48:23 GMT, "Daniel"
wrote:

FX5200 is an entry level card (slow) and your
4600 was top of the line in its day (fast).

i'm sorry but i score in 3dmark01 around 7000+
with a fx5200 no o/c

If you want to see the power, put your card in her system.
Your system is to slow to make use of the 4600's real power

if he as 4600 point it means that it's system handle 4600 point.


Daniel


"Shaun Pudwell" wrote in message
...
My wife has a Compaq Presario 1.7Mhz with a GeForce FX 5200. Halo for the
PC runs as slow as it does on my PIII 500 with a GeForce 4 ti 4600. Does
anyone know why this is?