![]() |
Best video card for under $100
Right now I have an ATI Rage 128 AGP card with 32 mb sdram. I would like to get a new card but since I have a 1.0 Ghz Athlon, 384 mb SDRAM, AGP 4x and I don't have much money there isn't much good in me buying a real high end card.
I don't care about brand or anything, I just want a good solid card overall. If it is passively cooled I would consider that a feature since I can't stand video card fans. So what do you think would be the best "budget" card? |
The solution is a GeForce 4 TI4200 64 MB. You can get them for $80-$100. They're incredibly powerful for the money. You won't find a better card for under $100. They do have fans on them, but I can't even here the one on mine at all.
-Lasereth |
GeForce 4 Ti 4200 - $99.00
Chipset/Core Speed: Geforce4 TI4200/250MHz Memory/Effective Speed: 64MB DDR/500MHz Or... OEM RADEON 9100 128MB - $69.00 Chipset/Core Speed: RADEON 9100/250MHz Memory/Effective Speed: 128MB DDR/500MHz The 9100 doesn't offer DVI out, is OEM, and has a fan. Other than that, seems to be a pretty good budget card. |
Or you can get the 3rd party Ti4200 For $74.00 shipped.
http://www.target-sale.com/tusa/item...gp/i03899.html Use Pricewatch.com for better pricing than Newegg. Nice stuff, but frequently overpriced. For the $99 they charge, you can get the 128MB version.... Personally, I would go for this, ATI RADEON 9600SE 128MB DDR AGP8X TVO/DVI - POWERED BY ATI $86.00 http://www.pcrapids.com/home.asp?pw=...idATI128M01972 DVI, TV out, 128MB, and true DX9 compatable. |
Quote:
Quote:
I still have to suggest a GeForce 4 TI4200. The 64 MB and 128 MB are nearly as powerful as each other (with the 64 MB actually out-performing it in some tests) and you can find both for under $100. Trust me, the GeForce FX 5200, 5600, and 5700, and the Radeon 9200, 9600, and 9600 XT still have NOTHING on the GeForce 4 TI4200. Well, not entirely nothing...they have DX9 support. But what good is DX9 if your videocard can't play the games that use it? -Lasereth |
Quote:
Maybe i'm missing something but as for the GeForce 4 TI4200, how can it beat out the Radeon9600 XT when the core speed is doubled? |
Quote:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...deon-9100.html The Radeon 9100 is really just a rebadged Radeon 8500LE (R200 core). Not likely to be faster than a GF4 Ti4200 if the R8500 isn't. |
Quote:
-Lasereth |
I'll vote for the Ti4200. 64Mb is clocked higher than the 128Mb version I think (so in some instances actually runs faster). I don't use 3D much, but I particularly like all the features NView provides for multiple monitor support (great for movies) and keeping windows at the front (vs Windows' irritating behaviour of always bringing things forward when you click on them)
|
|
Quote:
-Lasereth |
stick with ati - nvidia is slowly loosing its grip on the video card market
unless you're worried about linux drivers, ati should be sufficient for your needs.. as for numbers i'm sure you can search tomshardware or arstechnica or anandtech or tweak3d etc... |
Quote:
ATI just released the 9800 XT. Man, it's beating the FX 5950's ass six ways to Sunday! Yeah...on 3d Mark 2001 with no AA, filtering, or resolutions above 800x600. Let's all take a look at actual games now. What, the FX 5950 is winning in half of the tests! Oh, and it actually got higher in 3d Mark 2003! Give me a break. The 9800 XT and 5950 Ultra are both excellent cards that excel in different games and benchmarking applications. ATI DOES NOT have a lead on NVIDIA, and NVIDIA DOES NOT have a lead on ATI. I don't care what mindset ya have, nothing changes raw data. If the FX wins in half the tests and the Radeon wins in the other half...how does that show that ATI is winning? None of this is even looking at the fact that NVIDIA currently has a videocard out right now that is years old for $80-$100 that is better than 90% of the new cards. This card even runs all of today's games at great framerates. It runs Half-Life 2 and Doom 3. It's called the GeForce 4 TI4200, and ATI doesn't have one. The closest competitor is the Radeon 9500 Pro which is much more expensive. If anything, NVIDIA is winning in the price-for-performance ratio. -Lasereth |
Quote:
The main reason I want a new card is that I ran the Performance Test benchmark software that came with NSW2004 and everything about my computer more than held its own against a comparably equipped computer except video, where it absolutely sucked. Plus any game that puts any load on the video just doesn't play well. |
I picked up a 5600ultra for $115....it seems to get the job done, usually will bencmark more than the 4800, but will lose to it in actual gameplay.
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project