gf 4 mx 440?

From the pixels, bits, and shaders to the graphic cards that power them. Discuss the latest from AMD and NVIDIA here.

Moderators: morphine, SecretSquirrel

Postposted on Wed Mar 27, 2002 3:16 am

Uh hello.
Should i get the mx 440 or the gf 2 titanium?
Cause well there both like the same price and same memory bandwith,cause i need a good card for my game medal of honor allied assault and with my crapass nvidia vanta lt ,only about 1 gig a second and yes i know that sux ,but these cards got 6.4 gb/s each so which should i get?
and which would i see a better framerate with
swill1496
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2002 6:00 pm

Postposted on Wed Mar 27, 2002 3:21 am

How important is 2D quality, DVD playback, and AA?

The MX440 will be better at those, and should, in theory, give a better framerate too.

In theory, I don't have any experience with GF2 Ti stuff.
Dissonance
TR Staff
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:00 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC

Postposted on Wed Mar 27, 2002 4:21 am

gf440? lol.... SORRY, but have you been reading any of the REVIEWs that have come out LATELY about it. [derez an abundance of doz reviews so i won't bother posting linkz here...] GF440 is BASICALLY a
REVAMPED GF2-
IT LACKS 'certain' features that the 'regular' GF4 HAS!! all in all, if u want dual monitor display go for it...

OTHERWISE, for PURE PERFORMANCE go for GEFORCE 2 TI, or, GEFORCE 3 TI 200....
personally, I'd get the GF3 TI 200- i own one=ppp

hmm..., thinking bout ATI RADEON 8500??... im not too sure bout that, i've had problems w/ their vid cards before- CRAPPY DRIVERS. ALTHOUGH, i've recently read that there RECENT drivers seem a little less plagued with problems [chk diz out
http://pcstats.com/].. so, supposedly it might actually be worth getting the ATI RADEON 8500.
wat evr u git iz up 2u..

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: legendz3120 on 2002-03-27 04:23 ]</font>
legendz3120
Gerbil
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2002 6:00 pm

Postposted on Wed Mar 27, 2002 3:11 pm

Argh.

OK, here's the rough breakdown, in terms of features/performance, slowest appearing first. Where the GF2-MX series falls is a matter of some dispute, but this is where their fillrate numbers puts them. The best bang for the buck right now is still probally the GF3-Ti200, for around $150.

GF2-MX200
GF1-SDR
GF2-MX
GF2-MX400 64MB
GF1-DDR
GF1-DDR 64MB
GF4-MX420 (*not a real GF4! more like a GF2.5)
GF2
GF2-Pro
GF2-Ti
GF2-Ultra
GF4-MX440 (*not a real GF4! more like a GF2.5)
GF4-MX460 (*not a real GF4! more like a GF2.5)
GF3-Ti200 <---best value
GF3
GF3-Ti500
GF4-Ti4200
GF4-Ti4400
GF4-Ti4600

EDIT: moved the GF4-MX420 further down the list, SDRAM really hurts.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lenzenm on 2002-03-27 15:13 ]</font>
lenzenm
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 6:00 pm
Location: Pleasant Prairie, WI


Return to Graphics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 7 guests