Of course - it was unexpected to me, I thought the 5200 was better than the MX400, I wasn't aware of the various flavours available.
Not a big deal, I purchased the FX5200 as I thought my MX400 was faulty - it's not so now I have basically two identically-performing cards 😀
My Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@tony359
tony359 wrote on 2024-01-25, 09:35:I thought the 5200 was better than the MX400
I own both the MX400 and the FX5500 (which is only slightly better than the 5200), and the FX5500 does outperform the MX400 in games like Quake 2, NFSIII and NFS:U.
Win98 rig: Athlon XP 2500+/512MB RAM/Gigabyte GA-7VT600/SB Live!/GF FX5700/Voodoo2 12MB
WinXP rig: HP RP5800 - Pentium G850/2GB RAM/GF GT530 1GB
Amiga: A600/2MB RAM
PS3: 500GB HDD Slim, mostly for RetroArch, PSX & PS2 games
The FX5500 is most often 270/400MHz@128bit which is slightly better than the fastest non-ultra 5200. OP's 5200 is one of the slowest versions.
Indeed, @RandomStranger.
With "unexpected" I meant "to me" 😀 Somehow I thought my 5200 would outperform the MX400 - but turns out it's doing what's supposed to be doing.
My Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@tony359
