Why is the Geforce4 MX series Crap??

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by Da_BomB_XpLoSiV, Jul 23, 2002.

  1. I just wanna know why it's gets bad reviews and stuff. Cos i don't see anything wrong with it cos some friends have a Geforce4 MX440 and works perfect...gets ok marks in 3DMark and stuff like that...

    I just wanna know...Why is it that bad...I just need some detail into too.

    thanx.
     
  2. Bytes Back

    Bytes Back Ex Police Chief

    Messages:
    1,383
    Location:
    Kernow
    I'm in your camp, I have one and dont have any problems with it. It throw Medal of honour around at about 40-90 FPS in 1024x768 and thats plenty good enough.
     
  3. cwalker2734

    cwalker2734 Guest

    Actually its a piece of junk and nVidia pulled afast one on everybody...

    The GeForce 4 MX series, uses the NV17 chipset, the very same chipset in the GeForce 3....

    So its not really a GeForce 4 at all, even the GeForce 3 Ti500 out-performs it.

    The GeForce Ti series uses the much faster, stronger NV 25 chipset. The MX has lower clockspeeds, and is really a marketing gimmick. If you think its OK, then no prob, but go check out a Ti4400, or a Ti4600 that is running full blast, and you'll throw that MX in the trash.
     
  4. Bytes Back

    Bytes Back Ex Police Chief

    Messages:
    1,383
    Location:
    Kernow
    This would be after getting a large bank loan ? ;) :D
     
  5. SlurpDog

    SlurpDog Guest

    Actually, it's even worse than that. The GeForce4 MX is really just a GeForce2 core with some slight updates -- it isn't a DirectX 8 part like the GeForce3 is. In fact, the GeForce3 is really a much better chip overall.

    You should notice when you run 3DMark that it refuses to run the Nature game and the pixel shader tests -- that's because those tests require a DirectX 8 card like the GeForce3 or 4 Ti. Current games will run fine on the MX, but many upcoming ones will look much better on a more modern card.

    The GeForce4 MX 440 is $69 on Pricewatch. The GeForce3 Ti200 is $86, and the Radeon 8500 is $91 (both have full DirectX 8 support and will generally be faster than the GeForce4 MX). Why anyone wouldn't spend the extra $17 is beyond me.
     
  6. cwalker2734

    cwalker2734 Guest

    Word !

    Speak the truth my brother Speak the truth!

    Tell ya what bytes back... the new ATI with the R300 chipset is set to come out this month...

    When I get that, you can have my GeForce 4 Ti4400 !

    The new ATI runs circles around the Ti4600 ...:D
     
  7. chastity

    chastity Moderator Political User

    Messages:
    2,273
    Location:
    Arizona near the Grand Canyon
    Well if u have a Geforce 4 Mx and u like it that is fine. But if it was me and I had the money I would get a GeForce 4 Ti 4200 with at least 128 MB of ram onboard but more then likely I would shot for the top as it were and get a Geforce 4 Ti 4600 with 128 MB of ram onboard but those cards r pretty pricey the last time I checked.
    all kinds of info on Geforce 4 cards

    and here Geforce 3 info
    Geforce 3 cards info
     
  8. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    agreed...

    I would rather get a next gen card with more features/capabilities within the same price spectrum than a g4 mx... no point in getting an mx... it IS a marketing gimmick...

    its like intel saying their intel p4 2.0 (non-northwood) are better than the amd xp 2000+ because it is faster... thats bulldroppings

    personally... I advise people not to buy the g4 mx series... its a waste...

    if you have 150 or so just get a g4 ti 4200... they are available for that low now... :)
     
  9. Man........the geforce 4 mx440 64mb, is not the best card but it does the job well, i score an ez 6000 in 3dmark,
     
  10. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    mate your cpu will help you as well...

    3d mark is NOT all the vidcard...
     
  11. Yeh true mate, but it plays an important role.
     
  12. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    not quite... you can have the worlds greatest vid card and an average cpu and though you will get good marks it will not be great...

    notice all teh top sysmark scores are based on powerful machines... its all on how the cpu handles the instruction sets too.. algorithms on the cpu go a long way to determining the score...

    of course a good vid card helps...
     
  13. MdSalih

    MdSalih The Boss

    Messages:
    1,730
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
    Moved to Reviews & Opinions - s00per m00deration techniques...

    MdSalih
     
  14. Friend of Bill

    Friend of Bill What, me worry?

    Messages:
    1,572
    See, ATI never did a sneaky thing like that...:)
     
  15. Cosmin

    Cosmin Graphic Designer

    Messages:
    1,633
    Location:
    Romania
    Well , you'll need a powerfull PSU . See " GF4MX440 driver problem " topic . :rolleyes:
     
  16. Electronic Punk

    Electronic Punk Administrator Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    18,590
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    My GeForce3Ti (The 'worst' GeForce3) is better than the GeForce4MX 420 - imho the 460 would ok, , but then why not just go for the 4200..

    The MX range was created to become the standard OEM choice, to replace the GeForce2, as the GeForce3 was never created with OEMs in mind, it was more for power users..

    In some senses it does seem sneaky, but when you look at it from this point of view it does make sense.
     
  17. Bytes Back

    Bytes Back Ex Police Chief

    Messages:
    1,383
    Location:
    Kernow
    OK !!!
     
  18. madmain1

    madmain1 Guest

    I've got the geforce 2 rather that the geforce 4 glad I did now!:cool:
     
  19. Iceman

    Iceman Moderator

    Messages:
    2,695
    My Geforce 4 MX does exactly what I want it to do, my computer is not for gaming anyway.

    That's why I have a X-box and a PS2 for gaming.

    :cool:
     
  20. Ripper2860

    Ripper2860 Guest

    I have a MSI Geforce4 440MX VTP (O/C'ed to 350/535) and a Gainward GF3 Ti200 (O/C'ed to 250/550). The GF3 is a better gamer's card and is quite a bit faster, although the GF4 MX 440 is no slouch!

    The GF4 MX serves it's purpose quite nicely as a generalist card for those looking for a relatively inexpensive "well-rounded card". The 2D quality is superb (GF3's and GF2's have had spotty 2D image quality although Gainward cards have always been excellent) and the NV17 core (GF4/MX) has the VPE (video processing engine) which provides excellent video capabilities and enhanced hardware DVD decoding. The VPE is not present on the GF4 Ti, GF3 or GF2.


    IMHO:

    Stay away from the GF4 420MX with or without DDR !!

    Those looking for a good all around "budget" card and looking for very good VIVO functions and DVD playback qulity, the GF4 440-460/MX will fit the bill. To me the speed is better than the GF2 GTS (thanks to the enhanced memory architecture - LMAII) and the video quality is excellent.

    Those looking for gaming and FPS performance which is value-oriented -- the Ti4200 is the way to go and the GF3 Ti200-based cards are great for the "monetarily impaired" gamer. Just get a brand known to O/C !! ;)