Get your S-Media GeForce FX card
http://www.komusa.com/smedia.html
Okay, so the makers of this graphics card has nothing to do with this site, I just thought it was interesting that there was an "S-Media" graphics card.
Too bad the cards aren't as half as good as this site.
Okay, so the makers of this graphics card has nothing to do with this site, I just thought it was interesting that there was an "S-Media" graphics card.
Too bad the cards aren't as half as good as this site.
0
Comments
//EDIT//
Looking at the photo, they don't look all that hot:
<img src="http://store1.yimg.com/I/komusa_1750_2545625">
It's not what the card looks like that dictates how it performs: It's what's under the hood that counts.
The 5200 is one cripled, weak, and fundamentally ill-designed card.
lol...i love it... fundamentally ill-designed
So, in other words, it's like 99.999% of the stuff nVidia makes...
TNT2 was good.
TNT2 ULTRA was good.
GeForce1 SDR was good.
GeForce1 DDR was good.
GeForce2 GTS was good.
GeForce2 ULTRA was good.
GeForce2 Ti was good.
GeForce3 ti200 was good.
GeForce3 was good.
GeForce3 ti500 was good.
GeForce4 ti4200 was good.
GeForce4 ti4600 was good.
GeForceFX 5600 Ultra is good.
GeForceFX 5900 Ultra is good.
nForce2 is good.
nForce3 is good.
GeForce2 MX 420 was not.
GeForce2 MX 440 was not.
GeForce2 MX 460 was not.
GeForce4 MX 420 was not.
GeForce4 MX 440 was not.
GeForce4 MX 460 was not.
GeForceFX 5200 is not.
GeForceFX 5800 is not.
GeForceFX 5600 is not.
nForce1 was not.
By pure nature of the game, the MX lines are suppose to suck. Fundamentally the GeForce2/4 MX were solidly made cards with good drivers, they just had the low performance to settle into needed pricerange.
In the grand scheme of things, out of all of their high-end products, only 4 can be taken as failures.
99.999% is a miserable and ignorant overstatement. Exaggeration aside, the intended purpose of the comment is equally narrow-sighted.
And how many successes has ATI really had, that being cards who are worth the buy over another product in a given price range for any period of time?:
8500
9500 Pro
9700 Pro
9800 Pro
Perhaps you need to reconsider.
1245
Thrax's verdict was exactly right.
However, they are cheap. If you only need basic 3d performance, $66 isn't damn bad.
NS
Thats better than the 885 I got with my video card.
That's A LOT better than what I got on my Radeon 8500. Of course the mainboard and processor are also a lot better.
And GOOD GOD!!! How did you overclock your Radeon like that, Geeky1?! You must have modded the hell out of it? Mine didn't go near that high! Most 3dmark01 points I ever got was 9000.
Hot Hardware, what I based my comment regarding the 5200 being performing about Radeon 9000 level on, if anyone was curious.