Hello,

I will have to upgrade my monitor in June or July, and I'm thinking of getting a wide LCD display, maybe between 19 and 22 inches. I presently have an old PCI video card and I don't think it will be able to drive the monitor at the high resolutions that these LCDs have. So I'll probably have to get a new video card. I don't play games and don't need anything fancy. I think I want a AGP slot, since my load seems be relatively high recently when I'm using Firefox. I suspect that this is because recently there are much more animations, flash applications than there were several years ago. I have an old PCI video card and I suspect that video sucking up too much memory bandwidth or CPU cycles and an AGP card might help.

The problem is that I have an Asus P4-P800 motherboard with an AGP slot, but the manual says that it takes only an 1.5V video card in that 4X/8X slot. It doesn't have a PCI-E slot. I prefer an nVidia board, but I'm willing to go with ATI. The Asus N6200 video card uses 3.3v so I won't able to use it. I haven't found the voltage required by other AGP boards because the information seems hard to get, but I've heard most of the newer AGP boards require 3.3V.

Does anyone know of an AGP video card that runs on 1.5V? My other requirements like it to have D-sub and DVI outputs, not run hot, and be fanless. I prefer not to use the Nvidia FX series of GPUs because I heard they run hot. If I can't get a suitable AGP card, I guess I'm stuck with a PCI card, and the only ones that fit my requirements are ATI cards.

Thanks in advance for any help.

klee12

I have a GeForce 6200 which matches your requirements; fanless, doesn't run hot, AGP slot, etc. I also have a Radeon 9000 that fits your requirements, too... and the Radeon 9000 is old enough to be very well supported by the open source drivers for ati cards.

So I could suggest you to go for a Radeon 9000 or GeForce 6200. They're both pretty low end, and so they'd be cheap. However, I don't know things so well, hopefully someone with more knowledge will post as well.

Good luck.

The FX series doesn't run any "hotter" per se. It may be you are finding a lot of reports from people who are using fanless video cards, and the FX5200 was a great choice for a fanless card. I don't think ruling out the FX series is necessarily a good idea other than it will be EOL'd sooner (end of life, when Nvidia decides to stop supporting it) but that really isn't an issue because existing drivers will work with it (and it's likely that the open source drivers will continue supporting them as well).

I'd strongly recommend against ATI simply because if you ever decide to do anything with your card other than light use (browsing the web, reading email) you may have an unpleasant experience where with the NVidia options you are much more likely to have a somewhat easier time making them do fancy tricks like roll over, play dead and sit The Nvidia cards just seem "better" suited for Linux when it comes to video (TV out, etc) and gaming (3D and GL modeling).

HTH

Cool

A GeForceFX is a waste of money. Go for GeForce6 6200 or GeForce7 7300.

I would not worry about the voltage requirement. My motherboard, ABIT TH7II-RAID, says the same thing in the manual, but a GeForceFX 5700 Ultra works. If you buy a GeForce6 or GeForce7, it should work with out any problems. Ask the manufacture of the video card.

Thanks to all who replied. I think I found a GeForce 6200 card from EVGA that meets my requirements. I was going to get a 6200 card from Asus and looked at the manual they had online. It said their card needed 3.3V power and I thought all 6200 cards needed 3.3Vs. After reading the replies on this board, I went back and looked at more 6200 cards. No other company that I found had the owner's manual online so I couldn't determine the voltage. But the 3.3V and 1.5V boards have differently keyed connectors to the motherboard, and I looked at the connectors in the picture of the board and found a board with 1.5V connector. So I think my problem here is solved.

Thanks again.

klee12

Can you elaborate on this?

Cool

nVidia went backward with their introduce of GeForceFX series instead of forward. The only models that show GeForceFX ok was a GeForceFX 5700 and up. The reason for this is GeForceFX 5600 and below has equal performance as GeForce4. At the time GeForceFX cards were introduced reviewers said to stick with GeForce4 or opt for a GeForceFX 5700 Ultra because you will be paying more for poor performance and for excessive heat. People got brain washed when they see the FX or X in the name of product. I think people praise to GeForceFX series to much to understand that they are paying more for poor performance and that there are now better models that provides performance at an understandable cost.

I recommend stop suggesting GeForceFX cards because they are a waste of money, waste of time, and a waste to be on the shelves.

That's interesting. One of the reasons I think the FX series are better than their predecessors (such as the MX line, which would be included in the GF4 line) is that the FX series seems to be the first to widely introduce features that make the cards useful for viewing HDTV on an actual TV. The FX5200 is the AGP equivilent of the 5700 so other than the AGP bus not being an option on newer boards, I think the FX5200 is a better option than trying to seek out a MX440 with a DVI and S-Video output coupled with the usual VGA.

So, it's not exactly a 'numbers' reason that I think the FX series is 'just fine' but rather an easy option. Looking for a non-FX GF4 card (such as the MX440) with the features an FX5200 typically offers is more work than just paying the extra 3 bucks to go with the FX5200. And I still stand by my "it's hot because it's fanless", I think most reports of fan cooled FX series cards don't show them being significantly hotter than the 6,7 or 8 series Nvidia cards.



Cool

Just about any video card can output very, very high resolutions, so they are already HDTV ready. If you are basing your buying decision on HDTV, you need to do more homework. First the content have to have high video resolution. Second the monitor also have to support the high resolution. I suggest stop wasting your time with GeForceFX because you just going to pay more for poor performance compared to GeForce4 cards. I recommend go for GeForce6 or higher.

Make sure the card supports dual link DVI or you're limited to 720P. My 7600 has one port that does and one port that doesn't.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/Some-HD...ngle-link.html

It's not about the resolution, but the ports themselves. By HDTV I mean Component and DVI outputs. As far as homework, I'm well versed in HDTV and what video cards are capable of handling specific outputs, but thanks for the advice The availability of the GeForceFX cards is what makes them more desireable than a typical GF4 card, the cost is about the same and the performance (when considering HDTV) is the same. The extra cost for going for a 6x series or higher isn't really necessary.

Cool

Actually, that isn't true. Dual Link DVI was supposed to be necessary for 1080p but single link is completely capable of displaying 1080i. However there are numerous reports of single link DVI also being capable of displaying 1080p, so it's questionable whether that is true or not (with the limited availability of 1080p content and hardware it's difficult to figure out the truth).

Cool

You are wrong. GeForceFX perform worst than GeForce4. The cost of a GeForce6 6200 versus a GeForceFX 5200 is equal.

I recommend stop suggesting GeForceFX. It is the worst series and has no cost benefit.

Thanks for the follow up. Actually the GeForceFX performs the same when comparing HDTV, the added benefit is that the FX series are easier to find, typically have more options for HDTV output connectors, and have a low cost. The 6x series are closely priced, but somewhat higher, and the 5x series are more plentiful (again, hints towards easier to find). I appreciate your recommendation, but it's not true.

The cost benefit is there, but I certainly would think you have a good argument if you were to say that the FX series will be EOL'd (end of lifed) before the 6x series, so paying the few bucks extra may be worth it simply for ensuring drivers exist for a couple months longer.

HTH

Cool