One thing that we can say for sure about the performance in this review is that the 9200 SE is consistently low and has frame rates lower than 10 in quite a few games. The advantage of the card is that it is the cheapest of the bunch and can be found for about half the price of the 9600 SE or 5200 Ultra cards (which is impressive for this price range). The 9200 SE does have decent performance in some games, and most games are decently playable at resolutions under 10x7.
If absolute minimum price is your requirement (and you happen to like one of the games in which it performed well), the ATI Radeon 9200 SE is the card for you.
The 9200 is slightly less expensive than the 9600 SE. The games that the 9200 SE did well in were topped by the 9200 in every case, but at this price point, it may be better to go with the 9600 SE, as it has consistently high performance, more than either of the cheaper cards. The same can be said about the NVIDIA 5200 Ultra.
If performance at a low price is what you are after, either the 9600 SE or the 5200 Ultra is a good choice. The best way to decide is definitely to look at the games that you will be playing. We recommend against buying the ATI Radeon 9200 non-pro, as you can get better performance for only slightly more money.
It is important to bear in mind that, even though two of these cards have full DX9 support, next generation games won't run very fast on them. The budget segment, however, is a beautiful thing if you need a stop gap card while waiting for the next generation of GPUs to come out in the spring.
I question the validity of a budget video card shootout when the test platform is and AMD FX51 processor running on a Nforce3 platform and utilizing 1 gig of ram( a setup noone who is shopping for a budget video card has). I mean, how many people out there who play games will put together an Athlon FX system with 1 gig of top of the line RAM and then stick a radeon 9200 in it? Nobody.
If you're trying to help people on a budget decide which card to buy I believe you should test the cards on a "budget" or mid-range system to show how the cards perform on the type of systems which prospective purchasers of these cards are likely to own. I would at least show one or two comparative benchmarks on a system with a mid-range althon, similar to your CPU scaling tests in past reviews. In it's current form, this article is misleading at best, and is going to convince someone who has a 1 gig athlon to go out and buy a radeon 9200 and try to play C&C Generals or Halo on it which is not going to be a very fun experience at 5-12fps.
PS - I just want to say that I generally love the content of this site and consider it to be the top tech review site on the net. This article, however, really got under my skin because people who don't have alot of cash to spend are going to rely on it without noticing the fact that the cards were tested on an Athlon FX51.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
View All Comments
KristopherKubicki - Monday, December 15, 2003 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1933...Radeon 9700 Pro outperforming the 9800 XT :)
Nice.
Kristopher
sauron - Monday, December 15, 2003 - link
I question the validity of a budget video card shootout when the test platform is and AMD FX51 processor running on a Nforce3 platform and utilizing 1 gig of ram( a setup noone who is shopping for a budget video card has). I mean, how many people out there who play games will put together an Athlon FX system with 1 gig of top of the line RAM and then stick a radeon 9200 in it? Nobody.If you're trying to help people on a budget decide which card to buy I believe you should test the cards on a "budget" or mid-range system to show how the cards perform on the type of systems which prospective purchasers of these cards are likely to own. I would at least show one or two comparative benchmarks on a system with a mid-range althon, similar to your CPU scaling tests in past reviews. In it's current form, this article is misleading at best, and is going to convince someone who has a 1 gig athlon to go out and buy a radeon 9200 and try to play C&C Generals or Halo on it which is not going to be a very fun experience at 5-12fps.
PS - I just want to say that I generally love the content of this site and consider it to be the top tech review site on the net. This article, however, really got under my skin because people who don't have alot of cash to spend are going to rely on it without noticing the fact that the cards were tested on an Athlon FX51.