Geforce FX 5500 128bit vs. 6200 64bit

jchen

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
122
My Geforce 3 Ti200 has finally perished (constant heating problems) so I was looking for an inexpensive replacement. I really don't want to spend any more than $40 on a video card (the computer is primarily used by my little brother who plays outdated games such as the original CS and WC3). Presently, there is a deal for the PNY Verto Geforce FX 5500 128MB (128bit) for $25 after rebate which seems like right in my alley. On the other hand, that is the price of a 6200 128MB (64bit). I've been getting mixed advice on which one to purchase, it's clear to me that the 6200 would seem to lag simply due to its memory bottleneck but on the other hand, I've also heard people unlocking the additional pipelines on their 6200s. Any advice would be appreciated (especially on whether the 6200 can be unlocked and if so, its performance vs. the 5500).
 
Some AGP 6200s are based NV43 core (identifiable by the small bridge heatsink next to the GPU heatsink, comes in 128-bit and 64-bit memory versions) and most use the NV44A (identifiable by the single passive heatsink and/or low profile cards, comes only in 64-bit memory versions, aka 6200A).

The unlockable NV43 cores are pre-rev A4. I've only had a 50% success rate unlocking A3 and earlier cores.

If you have a source for $25 NV43 6200s let me know! :D

Go for the 6200A if those are your two choices. FX 5x00 chips are horrible overclockers and the 6200A will be faster in most games at stock and faster in everything when both are overclocked.
 
6200 definitely. I have one, and it overclocks like mad (assuming you have decent ventilation). It performs a bit better than the 5700 as well.
 
Back
Top