Graphics GeForce4 or GeForce3?

Which do you think is better for roughly the same price, a GeForce3 TI200, or a GeForce4 MX440?

 

Neither one is worth upgrading too. Pricewatch.com has a GF4ti4200 64mb for $109...the 128mb is only $139, I would suggest you stretch a bit further and get the GF4TI4200 or better. Or save until Feb and get a GFFX.

 

I have to agree with that

 

You know what's kinda funny about your question Frag: you're basically asking which is better and the two products are exactly the same. nVidia's naming scheme is just about as bad as AMD's PR system.

 

Thought the MX 400 series was based on the Geforce 2 and the Geforce 3 ti was a completely different beast.

MX400 a geforce 2 with extrabit tacked on.

 

GF3 Ti200 is basically a GF2, Ti500 and the original GF3 are purely GF3 though.

 

Frag, I wouldn't get either one. I would save a little more and get a 128MB 4200. Or if ya can wait a month or 2, the new Geforce FX.

 

well I don't have a lot of money to spend and I'm upgrading from a TNT2 so I can live with a GeForce3 TI200 or GeForce4 MX440. I don't play a lot of games, but when I do, I want to actually be able to play them. So out of those 2 cards, what can you guys recomend?

 

id go for a gf3 ti200...as it fully supports dx unlike the mx series of gf4's....

 

It really would be worthwhile to go for a card that is based on the original geforce3 architecture/feature set (such as the GF4 Ti4200 which can be found for about £120 most places now I think and cheaper if you look around no doubt). The problem with the cards based on GF2 architecture is not just a downshift in tris/second but you lose a lot of the stuff that makes those triangles pretty. The geforce3 architecture has a much more advanced register combiner stage (more combiners and some little bits of related stuff that allows you to make more of the combiners). It is the case with some effects that you simply can not fake effects when you are faced with less register combiners (extra passes not being able to acheive the same end result).

As you start throwing more and more lighting effects in for example you hit a point where you NEED those extra combiners.

If you can stretch the budget, wait a couple of months (when the new cards come out you would expect the older cards to fall in price of course) then do it and you'll make more of your money...

Hope that helps...if you can't wait then go with the GF3 the GF4MX aren't so good

 

Whatever you do, just don't get the G4 MX - it dosen't even have pixel shaders - The Gf3 has those, no matter what version you get.

 

What a load of bollox a GF3 ti200 has a slower core/memory than the other GF3's thats all.

 

Herbs has it right...

GeForce 4 MX of any variety is closer to the Gf2 in terms of architecture than anything else. The Ti cards are a whole new ball game.

GeForce 3 Ti200, Ti500 and plain ole GeForce 3 all share identical architecture and only differ in clock speeds.

The Geforce 3 Ti200 is the better of the cards, being direct x 8.0 featured (as in supports the full range of DX 8.0 effects) rather than direct x 7.0 of the GeForce 4 MX. Personally though I'd save a little extra and go for a geforce 4 Ti4200, as in the long run it will be more worthwhile.

GeForce 4 MX of any variety isn't really worth touching with a bargepole IMHO, its a marketing gimmick of the 'GeForce 4' name that makes it sell, not its performance, where it is littler faster than the GeForce 2 Ultra (and thats the top MX, the MX460....MX420 and 440 are slower still).

Anyways, wrong forum hold tight

 

So I was right was I ?

wooooohoooooo

 

I understand what you are saying about your budget. I have a family of 5 to support. Thats why I am trying to stop you from wasting your money.

Beg or borrow what you need to get the GF4TI4200. It isnt much more money, but an entire world of difference performance wise. It will last you much longer than that GF3 is going to, so it will save you money in the end.

Even the games out now, pre-Doom III, are stretching a GF3. Games based on the new Unreal Tournament engine work a GF3 over..you will have to turn all sorts of details down to make it playable.

Ask Santa for a few bucks more...it will save you money in the end.

 

If you can't afford the 4200 go and get ati rad 9000pro for about £70 these kick the gf mx 4xx series for about the same price.

 

What an utter load of ****

Say something true or sensible, or don't say anything.

GF4MX is not worth buying, as any GF3 card will thrash it in DX8 situations, which will only become more common. GF4ti4200 is probably the best budget choice right now though.

 

Whypick that it incorrect, the GF 3 Ti200 is a proper GeForce 3.

Here is the list of nvidis cards and their position in the market.

Slowest:

GF2 MX200
GF2 MX
GF2 MX400
GF2GTS-V
GF2GTS
GF 4 MX420
GF2Pro
GF2 Ti
GF2 Ultra
GF 4 MX440
GF 4 MX460
GF3 Ti 200
GF3
GF3 Ti 500
GF4 Ti 4200
GF4 Ti 4400
GF4 Ti 4600

**NV30/GeForce FX not released yet.......*****

Fastest.

 

don't you guys *hate*how manufactures put in *GeForce 4mx* in t their system and say its *lighting fast* or *amazing* video quality. I think its such a p!55 take!

The prices are good but then you get a complete sh!te whole of a graphics card........

 

Solution: Build your own

Know w00t ya mean Koing, 'at the end of the day' its just 'advertising spin' they push PC's on to the public using brand names and 'sexy words'

There not gonna say average performance by today's standards, and will have difficulty playing the next generation of games @ acceptable frame rates

now r they