What's the best nvidia-based graphics card that runs fanless without modification?

Since I'm sure the quickest response to this would be "best for what?", here are other desired qualities, in order of preference:

1. Impeccable 2D display quality. I don't tolerate weird artifacts during normal 2D use much better than I would my computer sounding like an airplane. At least I can cover up the airplane noise by playing some MP3s.
2. Output options (like TV, VGA, DVI out, dual-display, etc.).
3. UT2003 framerate @ 1024x768 with default detail settings.
4. TV input.
5. Low price.
6. Nice software bundle.

Try this:

http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.a ... 14-170-027

Albatron Geforce FX 5200 -- Model FX5200EP

I was thinking of that one myself. I think with a panaflo running of of a Zalman Bracket you'd be perfect.

Does it even need that?

Doubt it, unless you have like zero airflow in your case. If a manufacturer makes a card with a fanless heatsink, it's fine.

I like to think that when it comes to a northbridge...

I guess for my own sake I like using the Zalman 123 with an 80mm to blow on my vidcard as well as hitting my memory a bit.

Outside of strong driver support, why nvidia (not that I'm biased, I have been a shareholder since 1998)? I mean, they design great chips, but for the low-end, I went with the Radeon 9200 (especially since Catalyst 3.6 is fine in general). You may also want to look into the Radeon 9200 cards...Just a suggestion.

Good point! Great price too!

Wait, blahblahbloo Specified they wanted TV in...

Now you have to get an All-In-Wonder. $$$$$$$$$$$$$

i'll second a 9200. The fx line is not too impressive to me.

I personally think the FX line of Nvidia cards is more future-proofed than a Radeon 9200, since it has DirectX 9.0 support.

When reviewers compare frame rates, they usually crank up the resolution to 1600x1200 with full antialiasing and anisotropic filtering. I personally play at 1024x768, as does the original poster. For those gamers such as us, being able to play games coming out two years from now at 1024x768, as well as silence, of course, and price, make the FX line very attractive.

So I guess you should get the Albatron then, eh?

umm i don't think in more then a year your frame rates will be acceptable with the 5200. the geforce 4 line preforms better then it. you may want to invest in a silent 9600.

But dude, $70 for a 128MB 8x AGP Card? That's ridiculously cheap.

ATI + Linux == suck

LOL true. The FX 5200 is no powerhouse for sure. But it will make UT2k3 look great at 1024x768, even with the eye candy turned up. That's no huge feat. DIII will be another story. Can't think of anything stock fanless that's not $400 that will future proof you.

It has TV OUT, TV IN is expensive stuff, and I would recommend a seaprate card for that. AIW is so-so on the video cap stuff, IMO.

well i was talking about future proofing. which is a ridiculous thoguht for a card under $100 in a couple years do you still think you'll be playing ut2k3? I mean 2k4 is coming out soon. i was thinking about getting a 9600 it's $124 for 128 mb and dx 9 compliant. currently the best stock fanless card (of course teh 9800 ultimate is better)

I just bought the Inno3D Tornado GeForce FX5200 based on a review here:
http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rlid=63007

Its fanless and runs at 128 bit, versus 64 bit like some of the 5200 boards.

The only place I could find it was here:
http://store.yahoo.com/amamax/vdspecialgfx52sa316.html

..nice OEM price.

I haven't received it yet so I don't know how well it works personally.

Rick

Well, then it becomes a question of buying a $70 card every year, or a $140 card every other year. I personally go the second route, but the reason I said the 5200, is because low price was on the requirement list. Of course "low price" is certainly a relative term.

Right now the 9500/9600/FX5600 cards I think are in the best spots.

you forgot you get better preformance currently to

I guess I'd go $70 every year because when I buy the $70 the next year it will most likely beat the $140 card in performance anyway...

hmm good philosophy. but we were talking about future proofing. and that wouldn't be future proofing.

This depends on how you define impeccable, but I have tried every single generation of nVidia cards and their sharpness in 1600x1200@85 Hz using the best CRTs available is not good.

That is, it's worse than Matrox or ATI Radeons.

Then again, ATI Radeon has this "rolling lines" or waves problem, which affects Trinitron based monitors and Mitsubishi displays.

Just FYI. YMMV.

regards,
Halcyon

Hi halcyon,

I've used the Radeon 64MB VIVO, 7500, 8500 cards (all are retail versions) with an IBM trinitron-based monitor and have never experienced any issues like that at all. Smooth sailing all the way.

Would you please elaborate?

oh, but you're wrong! Nvidia's decision to add DirectX9.0 support to is GFFX 5200 line is all but a marketing scheme. Cards like the GFFX 5200 and even the Radeon 9200 (if it had DX9 support) would not be able to even run DX9 games at good image quality (which is the main reason for DX9 support, right?) due to their limited memory bandwidth. Like everyone else had said, if you want future-proofing as well as silence, go with the Radeon 9600 series.




BTW, Gigabyte and PowerColor (both premier ATI partners) provide VIVO Radeon 9200 models that may be found at NewEgg.com.

Sure, these fanless Radeons sound nice, but ATI driver support in Linux really is bad enough to make any Radeon completely useless to me.

I ordered one of those Albatron cards linked to up at the top of the thread. We'll see how it works. It should be fine, since the monitor on the machine it's going in is only capable of 1024x768.

I didn't mean to say that TV input was required. It's just that if there were two fanless nvidia cards that were equal on requirements 1-3, one of them was cheaper, and the other had TV input, I'd get the one with TV input (within reason, of course). So low price is a lower priority than TV input, and TV input itself isn't all that important. But then, I put low price so far down on the list because I knew that insisting on an nvidia card that came stock fanless already put a fairly tight price cap on things.

Oh, of course, I realize Matrox is better, maybe even to the point where the worst Matrox card is better than the best nvidia card. But as long as the 2d display quality is as good as you can get without going to ATI or Matrox and without needing a fan on the GPU, then that's good enough.

let us know how it works out.

It seems to work pretty well so far. The picture was nice and crisp at 1024x768 (the maximum resolution for the monitor used on the machine that this card was for). Haven't heard any complaints about it at all. Next time I go over there I'll have to install Quake 3 to see how it runs.