Do I REALLY Need Direct X 9 ?

[MegalosSkylaki]

I've read an FX5200 can beat a Ti 4600 in speed ( FPS ?) but given that the Ti4600 is a very good card and is selling at distress prices now, what is really the big deal about Direct8 if I mainly want it for Video and DVD -- not state-of-the -moment Gaming ?.

DOOG

[Urban_Squrill]

Direct X 9 is mainly for new games. Which there are not any that i can think of that currently use direct X 9 to the full extent. I think Nvidia really messed up making the 5200. The 4600 is a rocksolid card.

[tgxiii]

I've read otherwise... the Ti series beats the FX 5200 in FPS.

[MegalosSkylaki]

So any reason to bypass a proven GF/Ti for an FX ? Other than being "up to date" if it's not of any practical use ? The only games I get are those they throw in with stuff, or are on clearance or second hand.

I got an X-Files written for Win 95, if I recall...

stay away from the 5200, its not worth the money. Direct x 9 is more desgined for the people who want mucho eye candy more than anything

Jason

[Sweeper]

Here is how they stack up:

[Jeordiewhite]

That's not quite enough info to really compare all the cards. Some will perform better in some area's and not in others.
MegalosSkylaki, where have you read this about the geforce 4 Ti 4600 being lower? These cards compare the geforce 4 ti 4200, however the 4200 is the better deal imo. Which the 4600 still is quite the performer.
However if you were intent on a newer card that performed well and had directX 9 compatiblity then you would be best off getting a geforce fx 5600.
However if you don't use any up to date game, then the geforce 4 ti 4200 maybe just the right card you need for a very good price.

[tony_j15]

However if you were intent on a newer card that performed well and had directX 9 compatiblity then you would be best off getting a geforce fx 5600.

Not if you want to game well. The Radeons beat the FX series HANDS DOWN across the board until you get up to the FX5900.

[MegalosSkylaki]

Well actually I "bit the bullit" and bought a MSI Ti4600.

I kinda suspected that the Direct 9 was just a "selling point" and just "planned obsolescence".

The reviews I've read for the Ti4200,4400,and 4500 painted a picture of a solid performer, with the 4400 the best "bang fer the buck".

I had my eye on the MSI because of some of its SW and generally favorable reviews and I saw one at a good price.

The "review" now I think I recall was just a reference to a review that showed the FX5200 faster -but that may have been on largely Direct 9 coded material.

I tend not to trust reviews anyway , unless there are several going in the same direction, and "user feedback" backs it up. I still remember when a major car magazines Car of The Year could be predicted by who bought the most advertising pages that year !

Anyhow, everything has to be evaluated as "good" in the context of "good fer what?"

I'm going to pair the MSI Ti4600 SVGA +DVI +TVOut with a LeadfastTV200XPDeluxeTuner card on an HTPC and a TDK DVD/+RW for a LR Multimedia rig, with Crucial CL=2.5 PC2700 1024 Mbs system memory.

(It was darn hard finding an affordable full ATX desktop black case, but I got for about $65 with an Antec True330W upgrade PSU which isn't sold anymore at Directron.)

Building on the Budget seems to be the real challange !

The only thing I haven't decided on yet is a ViaKT400/Ultra or an NVidia nForce2 400 Mobo.......

DOOOOOOOG

[Jeordiewhite]

Originally posted by tony_j15


Not if you want to game well. The Radeons beat the FX series HANDS DOWN across the board until you get up to the FX5900.

I've got a radeon 7500 and it still does quite well at 1280x1024, I'm supprised by it, since it's on an asus a7n8x deluxe, 1gb dcddr pc3200, athlon xp 1800+.
I'm sure that card will play any game out there now