Quote:


I have been using a GeForce FX 5200 for awhile now, paid less than $100, have 768mb ram, and it runs great!
I can maintain 27fps easily even with the settings mostly maxed, I have also had my frame rates as high as 32 steady (when I had them locked at 40).
It will depend on the computer I have found, many think the 5200 suck, even ones with a better computer than mine, and many say it is the best. I personally think for the money it is the best.
It is also becoming more known that the amount you spend on a card doesn't mean you'll be getting anything better!!!!! A $80 card can equal a $400 card, plain as that. The real differance is your computer. and that theory I'm a firm beliver in.
I have talked to someone that has the same computer as I (Dell Dimension 4500) everything the same except for the card, they went out and got a GeForce 5700 (?) and it is no where as good as mine just more pricey! Your system is what makes the differance not the cost of the card.
Now as far as other games , Painkiller, my computer and card couldn't handle it, so Farcry I won't even bother spending the money on. But in FS9 works great, low cost so might want to look into it!

I would go for the 128mb, that is what I have.
I would also go for another stick of ram if you have the slot for it.
I don't understand your specs???
512mb of ram with 448 available running Windows XP???
Doesn't make sense because Windows itself uses 200+mb add the 64mb for your video your available ram is probably more around 240 +\- MB.
So I would say the 128MB card and more RAM and you will see a big improvement!
I'm not the best one to ask on this matter, but maybe someone will come along and verify that my reply is correct