Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

NVIDIA GeForce 4 Ti 4200 AGP 8X 64MB

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 20, 2006 8:50:53 AM

I put this card with an AMD Atlone 2100 socket 7 chip running at 1.74GHZ on a Epox motherboard, the EP 8K5A2+. This is very much a work orientated machine that is suffering from slow image updating. I believe the video card is the main source of the bottleneck.

I was considering a Sapphire X1600 Pro but got a fright when I saw the pin connection arrangement on the box and fears of compatibility arose.

The pin arrangement on my existing graphics card consists of three banks of connectors: two at 23mm wide and one in between of just 18mm.
September 20, 2006 9:23:48 AM

If it's an AGP 8x card, and you've got an AGP 8x card already, you'll be fine.
September 20, 2006 9:42:15 AM

If the processor is in socket 7 its NOT an athlon. If its AMD its a K5 or a K6. If its 200 Meg or above then its a K6, or one of its many variants.

There is a compatability problem with old AGP. I cannot remember which way round it is. I think that its that you can not use the old cards in newer motherboards but I do not know for certain.

I would think that for image processing that a socket 7 system will be way too slow these days. If your are using older software and are happy with it then fine. If its running too slow for you then you will be much better updating your system, i.e. new CPU, motherboard, hard disk, memory, graphics card, and probably monitor as well.

Rob Murphy.
Related resources
September 20, 2006 10:54:54 AM

google told me that EP 8K5A2+ is a socket A mobo, made for athlon XP, but its AGP port is 4x only

IMO, the graphics card is not really the bottleneck... a G4Ti4200 is still quite a good card, unless you want to play recent games. as long as it is a work computer, it is enough, and it will even do better than current low-end cards.

maybe you should tell us about the rest of your rig... amount of ram, etc...
September 20, 2006 11:11:51 AM

You sure that 4200 is AGP 8x? Because my 4600 has a maximum bandwidth of only AGP 4x.
September 20, 2006 11:19:46 AM

Quote:
google told me that EP 8K5A2+ is a socket A mobo, made for athlon XP, but its AGP port is 4x only

IMO, the graphics card is not really the bottleneck... a G4Ti4200 is still quite a good card, unless you want to play recent games. as long as it is a work computer, it is enough, and it will even do better than current low-end cards.

maybe you should tell us about the rest of your rig... amount of ram, etc...

agree
seems like a driver issue to me. Are you using nvidia's driver or windows driver?
September 20, 2006 11:21:31 AM

Quote:
You sure that 4200 is AGP 8x? Because my 4600 has a maximum bandwidth of only AGP 4x.


The original set of 4200/4400/4600 were AGP4x, but I they updated them later. I think the 4600 became the 4800, but the others kept the same name but faster transfer rate (I'm trying to remember magazines from about 5 years ago so I could be a little sketchy).
September 20, 2006 11:29:18 AM

Quote:
You sure that 4200 is AGP 8x? Because my 4600 has a maximum bandwidth of only AGP 4x.


Third item on the list at: http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce4ti.html

The 4200 had a 8x AGP version, for whatever reason...I guess the 4600 just got left out. [Or, as the slew of other posters suggest, the 4800 is a 4600 with 8x AGP?]


To the OP: Courtesy of Wikipedia , the two 'gaps' present on your old card's connector ensures that it would fit either a 1.5V (AGP 4x) or 3.3V (AGP 1x/2x) slot. As your mobo supports AGP 4x (has a 1.5V slot) and the x1600 Pro is AGP 8x/4x compatible, you should not worry about any mismatch.
September 20, 2006 11:30:00 AM

Quote:
You sure that 4200 is AGP 8x? Because my 4600 has a maximum bandwidth of only AGP 4x.


They usually say Ti4200 8X on it somewhere, and the Epox is 4X.
September 20, 2006 11:30:04 AM

Quote:
You sure that 4200 is AGP 8x? Because my 4600 has a maximum bandwidth of only AGP 4x.


The first versions of the GF4 were 4x cards (NV25) but later, nvidia made a new version of the chip (NV28 I think) for Ti4200 and 4800 that supported AGP 8x
September 20, 2006 12:28:08 PM

You guys! It's amazing what you all come up with! I assumed it was socket A. I read off the AMD athlone from my PC's hardware profile, and as for the video card and mother board I just read off some details from the components themselves .... So I'd agree with 'MesaRectifier' and 'japjones' and accept mine is 4x.

Anyway, here's my existing hardware for 'raytracer06' and others:

AMD Athlon XP2100+ at 1.74GHZ
VCard as above.
Ram is 1MB. Who's ram? No idea. I got it at various times.
80 GB storage and I've 54gigs remaining - so no rush there.
Monitor is a 19" Samsung Syncmaster 193V
I'm very happy with ancilliaries and see no need to replace them - printer, scanner, mic and camera, sound is Creative Audigy with Logitech ZXR 500 spkrs.
I suspect my basic power supply would need to be replaced for new kit as its only 350W. So new case required.

My software is demanding.
Windows Pro, Dreamweaver and Fireworks plus Adobe CS2 Suite for example. When simultaneously messing with Indesign, Photoshop and Bridge it fair clunks through from one image to the next. It is for this reason I'm looking to upgrade.
The whole kit is very noisy, and with a new one I'd be looking to get the noise reduced.

My initial thoughts regarding Video card was a means to see me through to new machine next spring. Saying that, I wouldn't need too much tempting for a new machine or more precisely a new case which I could plug my existing kit into.

Earlier I looked in at the forum chat about AMD vs Intel esp Intel CD2 transfer. I must say that AMD have earned my support in the past because they provided a good chip at a price I could afford when Intel's price were beyond my reach for the equivalent. Crucially, without AMD Intel would have rested upon its laurels just like microsoft has done and we'd all be the worse for it. That said, people want to get the best kit for their buck.

Seems from your comments that I could well find myself with compatability issues which would mean expensive downtime trying to sort it all out with little real improvement using my existing kit. So I'm leaning away from just having a new card by itself.

So I'm happy to get a new case and stuff minus monitor and keyboard etc
As for my own budget? It's reasonably flexible around £800 at present. But it would be cash, and I'm quite prepared to wait and save a little more IF the wait brings something that I can really see a difference with. But I'm not prepared to buy the 'Ferrari' when the 'Honda' can get me there just as fast for half the bucks.
September 20, 2006 12:28:27 PM

Quote:
I put this card with an AMD Atlone 2100 socket 7 chip running at 1.74GHZ on a Epox motherboard, the EP 8K5A2+.


It is an Athlon, Socket 462, AKA- socket A.

Quote:
This is very much a work orientated machine


Now that we know where you are using it, we only need to know WHAT you are using it for. You mention "Dreamweaver and Fireworks plus Adobe CS2 Suite for example. When simultaneously messing with Indesign, Photoshop and Bridge". None of these should benefit even the tiniest bit from a video card upgrade, except I don't know what Bridge is (unless you mean the card game, but even if you do, it is doubtful a game like that would have even a tiny benefit from a newer video card either).

Quote:
that is suffering from slow image updating.


When, exactly?

Quote:
I believe the video card is the main source of the bottleneck.


Why?

Normally, in typical office applications such as MS office, websurfing, email, or other typical 2D window(ed) programs, a Geforce4 TI4200 is several times too fast to be a bottleneck. More often, when you see windows being redrawn slowly it is because the system has ran out of memory and the application is waiting for the paged data to come back into main memory- the video card can't display what the system can't draw- until that data is available in memory again, or in some cases, till the CPU is free (in buggy apps, multitasking where another app is set at an improperly high priority, or similarly, a virus or other malware misbehaving).

It could be (video) driver, but it's doubtful.

Quote:
I was considering a Sapphire X1600 Pro but got a fright when I saw the pin connection arrangement on the box and fears of compatibility arose.


It would seem most expedient to not drift down this tangent until it is determined exactly what, where, and why your system is having some kind of problem.

However, your board uses an AGP Universal Slot, meaning it can support a newer AGP card though it will run it at 4X rate (max) instead of 8X. This is not going to be a significant performance penalty for a system based around an XP2100 CPU, for gaming or other graphically demanding (CAD?) uses. For general office work as suggested above, it will not matter the slighest bit since the GF4 Ti4200 is already overkill.

How much system memory is being used? Check Task Manager, the "Commit Charge", "Peak" value is what you need to know, AFTER having ran these demanding tasks and having seen the sluggish video.

Next, compare that Peak value to the amount of memory installed in the system, the "Physical Memory", "Total" value.

If the PEAK value is not at least 128MB lower than the TOTAL value (the extra 128MB to allow for a filecache so the OS code isn't continually being swapped out), definitely add more memory IF you want to continue using that system.

If the PEAK value is within 384MB, you may still benefit from adding memory, allowing an even larger persistent filecache (particularly after system has been running awhile or if files or apps are frequently reused).

If the PEAK value is never that close to the total, you are most likely CPU bound or have some other issue (possibly bad app priority or other OS or viri issue as mentioned above).

If your productivity is tied to profit or promotion, it seems reasonable to just shoot for a newer system if the budget allows. Might as well go for a platform using PCI Express, although even the newest/fastest systems today will not be bottlenecked at the tasks you described, by a GF4TI4200 (if they were AGP and could use it), except for "Bridge" which I mentioned above as an unknown variable.
September 20, 2006 12:30:52 PM

GPU doesn't limit Photoshop, it's all CPU and RAM. Just look at all the people who run it quite happily on Mac Minis with a GM950.
September 20, 2006 12:49:37 PM

As I thought, the apps you're using don't require a great video card, since they're 2D applications.

On the other hand, those apps are very demanding for CPU and RAM. And I think your Athlon XP 2100 is the bottleneck. You should consider a CPU upgrade. If you don't want to change all of your hardware, you could maybe get a faster athlon XP (I have a 2600+ that I use for photoshop and 3dsmax, and it still does the job). the problem is that you may not find one easily, since these are "old" CPUs, and it would only be a small upgrade.

a more significant upgrade would mean changing your mobo, cpu and ram (and graphics card, and maybe even your PSU)

I understand you don't want to buy a brand new machine, but there's a real "generation gap" between your PC and current machines. if you change CPU and mobo, you'll have to get new RAM because CPUs now work with DDR-2 instead of your DDR. Same goes for the graphics card, that use PCI-Express instead of AGP. Even PSUs must have more connectors than they used to.
Anyway, if you decide to change everything, you should go for a Core2Duo. Even the smallest C2D will do a great job. After that, you can still save a few bucks on the video card, since you don't need a high end one

anyway, before considering any hardware upgrade, you should definitely check for your video drivers. Even though windows Xp provides drivers for your geforce4, they're not optimized and display refresh can be slow, even in 2D (you can see it when moving windows, or when menus appear : it is not smooth). You should take a look at the device manager, and check if the video card driver is provided by Microsoft. If it is, just download nvidia drivers and install them.
September 20, 2006 2:16:04 PM

Thank you everyone for your very useful input esp. Raytracer06. My drivers are OK but I agree with you. But this discussion is moving away from graphics cards so it's best to move to another forum and check out what they're saying about those C2D's.
September 20, 2006 2:54:55 PM

man, i have this VGA and its still a very good one ( considering its time....).
You may install the latest drivers from NVDIA
http://es.download.nvidia.com/Windows/91.47/91.47_force...

and make sure that it isnt getting too hot, maybe its fan is broken and the card is praying for his life..... xDD
!