Welcome to Gaia! ::

Speaking strictly from my experience as a PC game tech support rep, if you're planning to play something that has been developed in the last 1-2 years, neither card is going to cut it. Both the MX-series and FX 5200 are built on the same basic architecture which does not allow for shading and lighting of pixels to take place. Any game you would try to play which requires this level of graphic command (for instance, EASPORTS' NBA Live 2005), will not look very good.

For the FX 5200, the upside is the increased memory sizes (128 or 256 MB RAM) as well as dual monitor and DVI support (very important if you're using an LCD monitor). If you're going to watch DVD's or project at a very high resolution, this card will allow you to do so with ease.

Unfortunately, the GeForce MX 440 doesn't have much upside. It's probably only going to have either 64 or 128 MB video RAM on it and it does not support DVI. You will be able to watch DVD's and other video files easily enough and may even get decent high-end resolutions but they will begin to fuzz out past a certain point because the processor is not powerful enough.

So far, with the GeForce FX-series cards, the best value I have encountered is the GeForce FX 5500. It comes in memory sizes (128 or 256), supports DVI and TV-Out (Dual Monitors), and will play all of the new games and look good doing so even at the highest resolutions (I play City of Heroes, Far Cry, Doom 3, and EQ2 without any graphic issues). Best of all, in comparison to any of the other high-end graphics cards (GeForce FX 6600 / 6800 or ATI's X-series cards) it generally carries the lowest price tag, averaging about $75-$90 where you can find it. The 128 MB model is roughly $10-$15 less but it's harder to find.