On Saturday, 9 July 2005 13:06, Erik Hofman wrote: > AJ MacLeod (email lists) wrote: > > On Saturday 09 Jul 2005 03:58, James Vahn wrote: > >>Pick something for me at http://zipzoomfly.com in the > >>$50 range, if you'd be so kind. > > > > Hmm. I know there are plenty of people here with far better technical > > knowledge of 3D graphics and the relative merits of the various > > generations of cards than I have, and I hope some of them will suggest > > something to you. > > Low-end FX5200 or later should be enough to have fun. Faster is better > (as always) but not necessary unless you're after something special. > > Erik
If you can get your hands on one of the Geforce 4 Ti range like the Ti4200, Ti4600 you should be happy. It's faster than the FX range up to to the FX5600 Ultra. The FX5200 is a budget card based on Geforce 2 hardware that has been made DirectX 9 compliant (which is of no use to FlightGear since we are using OpenGL anyway). The FX5200 is consideably slower than the GF4 Ti cards since it only has a single texture unit per pipe as opposed to the GF4's 2 texture units per pipe. FX5200 = 4 pipes x 1 texture unit per pipe = 4 texture units GF4 Ti = 4 pipes x 2 texture units per pipe = 8 texture units A good place to start is Tom's Hardware VGA charts. http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/vga_charts.html Regards Paul _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
