Our test set up includes DirectX 9.0a, the VIA Hyperion 4.46 4in1 driver, and the nVidia 43.45 driver. We used a fresh install of Windows XP Pro. All benchmarks were completed with no other software programs running. We had our XP 2100+ processor running at default speeds of 133FSB x 13multiplier to give us 1.73 GHz. For overclocking the video cards, we used the Coolbit Tweak with the 43.45 driver. The resolution of our system was set to 1024x768x32 and on our benchmarks. We chose to use the Albatron Ti4680 to compare to the MSI FX5200-TDR128 because the Ti4680 is a Ti4200 with 8x AGP and 128mb DDR Memory. The MSI FX5200 is also 8x AGP with 128mb DDR Memory. So this was the closest card we had as far as matching the performance of the FX5200.
We ran the following benchmarks with the Albatron Ti4680 and the MSI FX5200 both at default settings and at Max OC:
On with the tests!
I saved the results section for the very end because I did not want to have to repeat myself over and over again. I think it is apparent which video card has more power at both default and OC speeds. This is very expected though, because the GeForce FX 5200 is actually supposed to be competition for the GeForce 4 MX440, not a Ti4680! Unfortunately, we do not have a budget MX440 on hand at Legit Reviews, so we were unable to make that comparison. As explained above, the Ti4680 is the closest card we have to the expectations of the FX5200.
However, I would like to point out what some of you may have noticed in the 3DMark2003 graph. The MSI FX5200-TDR128 OC’ed to 312/540 was able to successfully surpass the performance of the Albatron Ti4680 OC’ed to 290/645. Now whether this is related or not, it brings up the fact that the FX5200 has DirectX 9 capability and the Ti4680 (along with all Ti4xxx cards) does not have DirectX 9 capability and the last game test (nature) in 3DMark2003 is designed for DirectX 9 technology.
Now for our conclusion.