Reply 20 of 26, by sliderider
- Rank
- l33t++
wrote:It was another really popular cheapo card. It was one of the first chips to bring the top end features to the bottom. Whether the features were worthless or not doesn't matter to the OEMs or even many upgrade customers apparently. You can see the same thing today with the low-end DX10 and 11 cards and IGPs.
Have to admit that back then I bought an FX5200 AGP thinking it would be better than the MX440 PCI I had sold - all that gobbledegook on the box, the fact that 5 is a bigger number than 4, and the logic that "surely the latest chips will be better than what went before"; may even have been a dx9 game I wanted to play. Little did I know I would spend a year scratching my head marvelling at the crap performance. On the plus side, that experience prompted me to take more interest in understanding what I was buying in future 🤣.
It was the start of the DX9 era and the abysmal performance of the FX cards that really got me more interested in knowing more about the cards, too. That was why when I upgraded to a new motherboard with AGP I went with a Radeon 9500 instead of an FX. The 6x00 cards competed better against the X800/X850 so nVidia did manage to make a comeback there but I think they lost it again until the 8x00 cards came out. The whole 7x00 generation seemed to lose it's way against the likes of the X1800 and X1900. The 8800GTX was simply amazing in it's time and I'd still consider one today for a low end system. I like them better than the HD2x00 cards. Nvidia stayed ahead through the GeForce9x00/HD3x00 era for the most part but I thought they started to weaken during the HD4x00, 2x0GTS/GTX period and now ATi is back on top again having sold more DX11 cards than Nvidia.