The scoop on MX video cards?

[Raly]

Go here: http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020418/index.html

You'll find that the regular GeForce 3 (non-Ti) far outperforms a GeForce 4 MX at nearly the same prices. I bought my GeForce 3 for $100.

[Roscoroo]

I noticed   my p-3 with a gf2 400 on a 56k connect runs teriable in the main  10-35fps.  it gets 35 -55fps in a h2h room.

At home on my DSL connection my 1ghz AMD w/ GF2 mx 400  never goes below 35fps and usually runs around 55-60 +
 Bolth machines have 265 in ram . Im not shure if the differences in machines causes this or the connect speed.

[Targo]

Raly its true ...I was looking for some benchmarks too ...

GeForce 4 Ti versus GeForce 4 MX

read here

Radeon 8500 versus GeForce 3 Ti500

read here

Geforce 3 Ti 200 versus GeForce 4 MX 440

read here and here

conclusion: go for GF3 Ti or Radeon 8500

[koala]

Im leaning toward buying a GF4 MX version rather than older Ti versions...am i wrong to do that?

Yes, yes you are.

[poopster]

Heres the breakdown on GeForce cards. There's ones that aren't worth buying and some that are worth saving for

I'm runnin a GeForce Pro that is more than enough to run this game, IL-2 and WWII Online. With a 1.2 T-bird with 512 of 2100 DDR ram.  If your upgrading it's really worth spending the bucks. As you can see some of the new cards really aren't a "step up". Sorta a side shuffle As you can see with the MX460-440-and 420.

Jeez the MX420 doesn't beat the GeForce 2 MX400 by much The MX 400 is HOW OLD ???



Chart taken from a poster at AGW, WB'ers NEED to stay on top of this kind of stuff  

[Kratzer]

Unless you have  ton of cash for a new Radeon or top flight GF4, get a GF3 Ti 200 - by far the best card for the money.  I've got mine overclocked to Ti500 levels and it runs great.

[easymo]

The hardiest FR test I have come up with, for AH. Is to go offline, ndisles arena, switch to knight CV, wait until there is a lot of smoke from flack fireing at the drones, set on the deck with motor ideling, fire guns when there are 2 drones on the screen.

At this lowest FR point, I drop down to 33 FPS., with a GeForce 4 MMX 440. Its very playable.

[weazel]

1024x768, 32 bit, 4XS FSAA
1GHZ AMD Athlon
256 mb DDR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In flight it produces a steady 75 FPS, on the runway usually in the 50's, heavy smoke at fields drops it into the 30's.

In some hardware reviews, depending on the software used for benchmarking it has proven to be a better performer than the GF3 Ti200 cards, particulary at high desktop resolutions/color depth due to the cards memory architecture.

It's basically a "perfected" GF2 chipset combined with the improved GF4 memory architecture.

-----3DMark 2001-----

GF4 MX440 vs GF2 MX400

4978-----------------2664      

 
Hard to beat for a sub $80.00 video card.

[bloom25]

By far the best bang for the buck is the GeForce 4 Ti 4200 64 MB cards.  If you can find the 64MB Ti 4200 card made by MSI it has faster ram than the others which can be overclocked within their specs to between 4400 and 4600 speeds.  You also get dual monitor support and TV out (RCA and S-Video).  They run about $160 - $180.

If you don't have that much to spend, the GeForce 3 Ti 200 cards would be my pick over the GeForce 4 MX series.  These should be near $100.

Anandtech has a really good GPU comparison using the upcoming Unreal Tournament 2003 engine which shows how the cards stack up.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1647

[bloodstain]

I am running the Gforce 3 Ti 200 and get a steady framerate of 75 in gv in the air or elsewhere. I had a G force 2 mx before and used to get 20-30 fps before. No matter if it is Gforce 2,3, or 4 Ti is always a better product in my opinion.

System AMD XP2000
1.00 Gb of DDr ramm
G-force 3 Ti200 64mb ddr
Windows Xp home edition

[akak]

Originally posted by Targo
Raly its true ...I was looking for some benchmarks too ...

GeForce 4 Ti versus GeForce 4 MX

read here

Radeon 8500 versus GeForce 3 Ti500

read here



Geforce 3 Ti 200 versus GeForce 4 MX 440

read here and here

conclusion: go for GF3 Ti or Radeon 8500

For $120 bucks, he can buy a GeForce 3 Ti200 128meg card.  

Ack-Ack

[Demosthanese]

Originally posted by akak



To start, the GeForce 4 MX line does not use the same chipset you find in the normal GeForce 4 Ti cards.  The MX versions use an older chipset than the normal GeForce 4 Ti cards, think they use the NV17 while the G4 Ti cards use the NV20 chipset.  You'd be better off spending the extra $$$ on a G4 Ti or if your strapped for $$$ then maybe looking at one of the G3 Ti cards.  I was able to pick up a G3 Ti200 128meg card for only $120 through PriceWatch.

Another reason to stay away from the G4 MX cards is that it doesn't support the full features of DirectX 8.x.  


Ack-Ack

I have found GF4 4200 for 138.
Let me find the link.

[Demosthanese]

http://avlogic.com/product.cgi?code=11028833

Sorry, $136.

Four page list of Vid cards. the above is on page four.
http://avlogic.com/pc/productlist.cgi?page=1

[bloodstain]

thats a good deal! to bad I dont need a new card or I would snatch that one!

[Obear1971]

dude, before you get a 200 buck vid card get some more ram, at least 256mb, ram is dirt cheap now. im on a ge force 2 card and get fine fps with 256mb, slows up at large furballing but not to single frame rates.

we had about 6-7 squddies up the other niggt (cant remer if you was up then or not) all in B17 x 3 WOO HOOO look so cool, takeing off and flying was fine, though it did get down to 10 fps initally on the floor at start, but we also had hangers buring smoke then too and that really attacks the FPS.

So go for another 256mb min and see how that slaps ya fps