Unfortunately this card doesn't offer any advantages beside of a supposedly good image quality, passive cooling and a DVI connector. In windows it is slow, and it's DX9 feature is worthless. On the other hand in an old K6-II system the cpu might be the bottleneck (= even this slow card is to fast)
I suggest that your're interested in it because it is PCI. Nevertheless it is said that nvidia based cards offer better compatibility in dos (and Matrox cards offer superb signal quality too). I don't know if there are also newer nvidia PCI cards that offer a DVI connector, if that's what you need.
If PCI & DVI is not a must have, you will be better off with a Geforce 2 Ultra, GF 3 or GF4 4600Ti.

Here is some interesting ranking of graphics chipset, the site is in german, but I think the chart speaks for itself:

http://www.pc-erfahrung.de/grafikkarte/vga-gr … krangliste.html

Radeon 9200 is a DX8 GPU based on Radeon 8500. I wouldn't mess with Radeons below 9700, honestly. No advantages really but numerous limitations.

It might be a decent PCI card though. Depends on what you want to use it for.

swaaye wrote:

I wouldn't mess with Radeons below 9500 Pro, honestly. No advantages really but numerous limitations.

fixed

so it is crappy 🤣
better keep the old Voodoo3/AGP that I use , so glide is an option too...

leileilol wrote:

fixed

🤣 yeah I thought of "fixing" that too but with 9700s and up so cheap these days might as well go with the 256-bit bus too!

keropi wrote:

so it is crappy 🤣
better keep the old Voodoo3/AGP that I use , so glide is an option too...

yeah can't go wrong with glide support. Voodoo3 will be more compatible with old games in D3D too. An AGP version of a 9200 might be interesting hardware to play around with though, but PCI will be a bottleneck.

if a 9200 is more or less a 8500 it will wipe the floor with a v3 performance wise, should wipe the floor with a voodoo5 as well an 8500 was about as fast as a geforce 4ti and considering a geforce256 was a little bit faster than a v5 a 8500 should be about 4x a voodoo5 or 8x a voodoo3

I'm struggling to find the review right now but as memory serves the Nvidia FX5700 is the fastest modern(ish) gpu your gonna find. Don't expect miracles since your not on AGP.. seen it first hand with a 9200 vs the original raedeon on agp.

Can anyone give some specific examples about the ATI and dos/vesa issues? that fact is a primary driver for me to get a fx5950 over a 9800xt... even though the fx is a little slower?

prophase_j wrote:

I'm struggling to find the review right now but as memory serves the Nvidia FX5700 is the fastest modern(ish) gpu your gonna find.

😒

I think he means for old games --DOS and Win98 and the likes.

Things being said, how about GeForce 6800GT? It is the last GeForce that supports Win98 --how many limitations does it have in running old Win98 games?

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

I think he means for old games --DOS and Win98 and the likes.

yeah, and I wouldn't recommend a Geforce for those (let alone a freaking FX series card)

The thing about the FX is that its engine is optimized for dx7/8.. where as the 6000 series and so is the 9800's pipelines. I took me a while to figure it out.. but after combing through tons of reviews and keeping track of what games they are using for the benchmarks.. AAMOF most games that have patches for the FX card actually set the games to use pixel shader 1.1/1.4 instead of 2.0.. cause frankly that will kick a 5900 in the gonads. Now in a win 9x environment there isn't going to be too many games that won't go below dx8.

Just because the new is backwards compatible doesn't mean it will be faster than the old stuff. The only reason a 9800 will be superior to a 5900 is AA/AF and dx9. But i'll trade that for dos compatibility.

Also when i said the fastest card i was also referring to pci bus