I've currently got an NVidia 4200ti graphics card and the fan has died for the second time. I'm not replacing it again. I play games like World of Warcraft, Live for Speed (probably the most demanding graphically that I play), and Hitman.

I don't need a card that I'll have to sell my kidney to afford. From this place what recomendations would people make and WHY? I'd like to stick with NVidia rather than go to Radeon.

I'd like to keep the price under $250. I see lots of cards under $100. Are these better than the 4200ti?

Thanks for any help you can offer,

speedfreak227

a little more details on your current pc and when you plan to upgrade it pls

AMD 3500+ (2.2Ghz)
1 Gig of Ram
400 Gig of hard drive.
Win XP

I have no plans to upgrade anything on it soon. It seems to do everything I need it to do just fine, except for my overheating graphics card.

Is there anything else that you need to know?

speedfreak227

a 6800gt or ultra would be a nice update for that system which should cost you somewhere in the low 100+$ range at ebay
unfortunately im not entirely sure which cards from the following gen are available for agp

well, seeing as you only want to order from that site, and prefer nvidia, you're only option is the 6200 (not the LE).

the only other agp nvidia cards are the mx4000 and the fx5200, which would be a down grade from your current card.

going ati, you could get...(most of these are under Sapphire)
x800 (a bit above your upper limit, but a great card)
9800se (meh card, but can be soft-modded into a 9800 pro, which is a very good card)
9600xt (fairly decent card)
x1300pro (decent card)
9800 (good card)

best card on the list is the x800, but its pricy. if you feel comfortable with the prospects of softmodding a card, go with the 9800se. But be aware, that it is possible to brick the thing. not likey, but possible, especially if you don't know what you are doing. after that, i'd say the 9600xt/9800/6200. and last choice option would be the x1300.

Why not the LE model?

speedfreak227

Quote from speedfreak227 :

Why not the LE model?

speedfreak227

LE models have slower memory, slower clock speeds, and they typically have less internal bandwidth, which serverly hampers performance. all of which adds up to a slower card than your 4200ti

What I remember that 9800SE had(has) a 128bit bus while 9800(pro) has 256bit. Some of the SE cards you could get running with 256bit and all the full pipelines active (to make it 9800pro), but this wasn't the case with all SE cards. So success of reflashing the card depends on the card. This was few years ago, so I might not remember everything exactly correct.

(shouldn't this thread be on the HW gfx card section?)

Just wondering is the ATI X1600 any good?

Yes for LFS it is very good, but the nvidia 6600 series is better at the same price tag.

Quote from KMSpeed :

Yes for LFS it is very good, but the nvidia 6600 series is better at the same price tag.

lies, the 76 series is where you want to be.

lies, the 88 series is where you want to be.

but that's all beside the point, because those cards are either not AGP cards, or not available from the vendor speedfreak wants to buy from.

DO NOT go for ATI, I went from nVidia FX5200 to ATI Radeon 9800XT.

I had no problems at all with the FX5200, as soon as I switched to the ATI card I had problems, mainly overheating problems, and I know that everyone else i know with ATI cards has same overheating problems.

Yes, I get better performance out of the 9800XT but the FX5200 isn't really a card to compare it to.

Stick with nvidia, trust me, you won't regret it!

Also could you not expand your websites to buy it from? I've heard the 6600 and 6800 series are the best 'low budget' cards from nvidia and the 6200 series aren't worth having, but I may be wrong there

Quote from mr_x :

Also could you not expand your websites to buy it from? I've heard the 6600 and 6800 series are the best 'low budget' cards from nvidia and the 6200 series aren't worth having, but I may be wrong there

No, you're right, the 6200 is the absolute bottom of the 6-series and as that, not much better than what he has now (it just wouldn't pay off)...

As for the rest of your post, I really can't agree... I've never had any problems with ATI cards, and nVidia and ATI are so close together, the badge on the chips doesn't really mean anything anymore...

The 6600GT is good on a budget, for a bit more see if you can find a 7600GT.

I went from an nVidia 6600GT to an ATI x850 XT PE, a lot quicker and I've had no bother with it, it cost more but that's life. If you're stuck with that one supplier, then you haven't a lot of scope and you'll suffer with value for money.

I'd buy this if it was me, or if you want to save a couple of bucks this.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

I'd buy this if it was me, or if you want to save a couple of bucks this.

crazy. i didn't see those. yeah, those are both really good cards. probably among the best agp cards you'll find.

i'd recommend the x800 above all, but its expensive. Next would be one of the 7600 cards, after that x1600, and after that a 6800 or 6600 if you can find one.

and don't listen to the fud about atis overheating. i've had two ati cards, and most of my friends have ati cards. out of those 10 cards, not a single one of them has had overheating problems.

i seem to remember a few years back, one manufacturer had some issues with not having a good seal on the heatsinks, which caused some of the cards to overheat. but the company replaced the cards of the people that were having problems, and have long since addressed the problem, and it is no longer an issue.

the x1600 is a decent budget line, a little below the 7600 line in terms of performance, but also 2/3 the cost.

i've got the x1600xt, and at 1440x900, i get ~150fp with no AA and no AF.

with 4xAA and 4xAF, i get ~100fps, depending on the track and number of cars. Lowest i've seen is around 70fps, at grid starts.

at 8xAA and 16xAF, it tops at around 75fps, and dips to about 40fps at race start.

also, i've had the card for about 6 months now, and have had several long gaming sessions (4+ hours), and typically run 2 hours at a time, and have never even come close to overheating the card.

ATi's do run toastie when put next to a nVidia card of the same range, which in effect does make your PC run a tad warmer, but nothing as bad as the gossip made it out to be. Mine (1900XTX 512MB) runs about 52c idle (though in this cold weather it is dropping to mid 40's, still far from the mid 30's my 6800GS got), and will hit about 70c full load (never seen it go much over that), but then at that point the hoover turns on and the system stays nice and cold anyway and things soon cool down.

All that said I do like nVidia over ATi (just because I like the control panel more), and my 6800GS was still running well when I changed to PCI-E and had to put it on early retirement.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

ATi's do run toastie when put next to a nVidia card of the same range, which in effect does make your PC run a tad warmer, but nothing as bad as the gossip made it out to be. Mine (1900XTX 512MB) runs about 52c idle, and will hit about 70c full load (never seen it go much over that), but then at that point the hoover turns on and the system stays nice and cold anyway and things soon cool down.

to be fair, thats what my 7950GT did with the stock cooler

Quote from Jakg :

to be fair, thats what my 7950GT did with the stock cooler

Guess it depends on your pick. My mates 7900GTX (or was it 7800GTX, I forget) ran much colder than my card, but the biggest problem with my card is the cooler, it is loud when it spins up and a bitch to dust when it gets clogged. I should change it, but I'm lazy.

hmmm, my 7950GT came at 1.35v (whereas other 7950's come at 1.25v) and was factory overclocked, and i overclocked it a bit more which could explain it.

The 7900GTX is the same as the 7950GT, only it has 1.4v on the core and a better cooler, which could explain it

also depends on what kind of heatsink the card has.

passive HS are going to run a bit hotter, but obviously much quieter.
"normal" HS/Fan is going to be cooler, and had minimum to moderate noise.
the HS/Fans that take up an extra expansion slot typically cool the best, but are also the noisiest.

that said, modern gpus are good for temps up to 90 to 120 celius (depending on the chip in question).

my 1600 has a "normal" hs/fan setup, and i've never seen it peak over ~70c, even after extended gaming sessions.

Well, I cheat a little as my X850, when overclocked (540/590) runs at 40-42C on load, but that's due to the DangerDen waterblock on it. I used to run a Zalman vf-700 on it, which was quiet and did a reasonable cooling job.