GF 4 MX 440 or GF 3 Ti 500?

[adek]

which is better and what version of nvidia drivers should i use?

 

[Krux]

TI 500 the geforce 4 mx is just a really fast geforce 2 no vertex and pixel shader support. in other words no doom 3 looking games for that card.

 

[Alex_is_Axel]

Geforce 3 Ti 500 is extremely greater in performance than the Geforce 4 MX as Krux explained in more detail Geforce 4 MX engines are built off the Geforce 2 stuff and the Geforce 3 editions are completely newer generation technology

at the moment 41.09 Detonator is the newest offical update.. havent had any problems with it at all

Hope this helps

Sincerly Alex

 

[Electronic Punk]

Definatly the GF3 out of the two.

 

[Cosmin]

Depends .. Geforce4MX has a newer generation technology as Alex_is_Axel said but I like your question about driver .. very interesting cause nvidia improves it's latest drivers especially for the latest chips' so I quess you'll find the answer alone ..

 

[Sazar]

gf4mx series cards are based on the gf2 architecture... therefore are dx7 parts... they just have higher clock speeds...

but the gf3 series is a dx8 component...

the hardware supports higher pixel shader versions and can do more in hardware than the gf4mx series... better performance...

but for around same price... buy a gf4 ti 4200 series card... based on gf3 architecture... but much better performance...

 

[Electronic Punk]

Or defect to ati right ?

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Electronic Punk
Or defect to ati right ?

it is comments like this that are really starting to bug me...

what is the relevance in this thread based on what I have submitted ?

 

[Athlon64]

I've just been looking into this very question as a friend of mine had a quote for a new PC. The company had specced it as an Athlon XP 2400 with a 128Mb GF4 MX.

The card I've chosen (as I'm now building his system) is a Gainward Golden Sample Ti500 128Mb (4ns memory) - actually a Ti200 chip running at Ti500 speed - bargain at £73

From what I've seen on TomsHardware etc this card should outperform a Radeon 9000 Pro and also the new Radeon 9100 (based on the old 8500 LE I think)

By the way, to finance the graphics card I've dropped from the XP2400 to a XP2200 - I said he won't notice the small drop in CPU power but will notice the better vid card. Is that correct??

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Athlon64
I've just been looking into this very question as a friend of mine had a quote for a new PC. The company had specced it as an Athlon XP 2400 with a 128Mb GF4 MX.

The card I've chosen (as I'm now building his system) is a Gainward Golden Sample Ti500 128Mb (4ns memory) - actually a Ti200 chip running at Ti500 speed - bargain at £73

From what I've seen on TomsHardware etc this card should outperform a Radeon 9000 Pro and also the new Radeon 9100 (based on the old 8500 LE I think)

By the way, to finance the graphics card I've dropped from the XP2400 to a XP2200 - I said he won't notice the small drop in CPU power but will notice the better vid card. Is that correct??

it will outperform the 9000pro... but not the 8500le unless it is oc'd ...

they should be around the same overall performance with the radeon 8500le/9100 able to do more in hardware due to higher ps version/architecture...

 

[Electronic Punk]

Originally posted by Sazar
it is comments like this that are really starting to bug me...

what is the relevance in this thread based on what I have submitted ?

Because that is exactly what I intend to do, have a mate going to germany who may be able to pick up a cheap 9700 Pro and I am very interested.

 

[Athlon64]

Originally posted by Sazar
it will outperform the 9000pro... but not the 8500le unless it is oc'd ...

they should be around the same overall performance with the radeon 8500le/9100 able to do more in hardware due to higher ps version/architecture...

Hi Sazar,
Off post I know, but are you saying a GF3 Ti500 won't outperform an 8500LE/9100?

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Athlon64
Hi Sazar,
Off post I know, but are you saying a GF3 Ti500 won't outperform an 8500LE/9100?

seeing as the 9100 is basically the same card as the 8500 series (LE actually) with fullstream done in hardware and renamed so as to better represent its performance compared to the 9000 series cards... it would appear as though this can;t be the case... in terms of raw performance the 8500le was a notch above the gf3 series (the gf3 ti 500 was released to compete with the 8500 series from ati and did well till ati's drivers matured)

therefore knowing what we do about architecture and what not... no... I don't think the gf3 series cards outperform the 8500le/9100 series of cards from ati...

 

[Taurus]

the only reason you would want the gf4mx is for nview junk. you can display on two monitors and a tv simultaneously... have them all clone (showing the same thing) or span (desktop spread across all two or three). the gf4 line let's you do this, as long as the card has dual-head support.

but i've also heard some say gf3's let you do this, too?

but if none of that really matters to you, get the gf3ti500, of course. or look at upgrading to the gf4 ti4200, if possible.

oh, and yes, upgrading the video card and lowering the processor a bit (133mhz lower) is a good idea. in the end, games will be smoother and look better (dx8 support).