Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GF2 Ti or GF4 440MX?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 28, 2003 3:08:20 PM

Hi all! I am new to the GPU world.
My computer specs were originally to be a P4 2.4GHz 512 MB RAM, MSI 6566E Motherboard) had a nVidia GF4 440MX. But while setting up the system, my vendor told me that the GF4 440MX card had some 'compatibility problems', and so offered to change my GPU into a GF2 Ti.
He claimed that it had better or at par performance with the original GF4 440 MX Card.
Since he changed it early today, I've came online to read as many articles I can regarding these two cards. While performance-wise, the vendor had been right to say that the two perform nearly the same based on many web-sites doing a benchmarking test.

But I'm not sure whether I've been shortchanged or not. Should I insist on using back the GF4 440MX card, or should I retain the GF2 Ti ( the vendor says that I can change it back if I'm not happy).Is there and advantage by using a GF4 card, compared to the GF2 Ti? Can someone help me here?
Thank you very much.

cec

More about : gf2 gf4 440mx

June 28, 2003 3:44:11 PM

Stick with the Geforce 2 Ti. The differences aren't enough to worry about.
-Brett
June 28, 2003 4:39:46 PM

The Gf2 Ti and Gf4 Mx440 are almost literally the same card, both based on the venerable Geforce2 GTS core. Compatability, he is seriously just bullshitting you about, as they both run on 4x agp (although admittedly, newer Mx440's do agp 8x, which doesn't do a whole lot of good anyway). Performance wise, they are about the same, although some Mx440's are faster due to slightly better memory. Stick with either card, you won't see any reasonably higher or lower performance.

I want to see an <font color=blue>Ati Radeon 99999 Ultra Pro</font color=blue>, based on the <font color=red>AtiRage core</font color=red>. And people wonder how a <font color=purple>Geforce3</font color=purple> is better than a <font color=orange>Geforce4 Mx...</font color=orange>
Related resources
June 28, 2003 10:56:54 PM

My old graphics card was a g4 mx 64 mb 4x agp, and I didnt have 1 single problem with it. I don't know anything about a G2 ti though sorry, but I am guessing that either one will work fine for you. I was surprised at how good the image quality was though on my g4, looked crystal clear to me, could have been that I was used to it though but I dought it.

<>------------------------------------<>
Settinng up my dream system right now :]
June 28, 2003 11:10:50 PM

I would return it and state that you are not happy with it. Refuse to take the MX version too (quote his compatibility problems) and just get your money back for that card. Now go out and purchase an ATI 8500 which performs as well as a GF3 but offers better 2d visual quality. It should not set you back any more cash so why not try it?

The aim of military training is not just to prepare men for battle, but to make them long for it. <A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=32..." target="_new"><b>MY SYSTEM</b></A>
June 28, 2003 11:16:32 PM

Get that punk to give you that GF4MX back.. unless it was the 440-SE model.

Both of the other GF4MX models are superior to the GF2Ti (440 8X AGP and the regular 440) and I bet it was one of those.

Also the gf4mx series have better 'internals' than the gf2ti's.. better memory architechure, better AA..
as far as compatibility issues i call BS on that one.. I'd want to see it myself.

Athlon 1700+, Epox 8RDA (NForce2), Maxtor Diamondmax Plus 9 80GB 8MB cache, 2x256mb Crucial PC2100 in Dual DDR, Geforce 3, Audigy, Z560s, MX500
June 29, 2003 3:46:44 AM

You won't see a difference in framerates unless you turn on Antialiassing. The Geforce4 MX's have much faster antialiassing hardware.

------------------
Radeon 9500 w/256 bit memory bus @ 367/310
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3439
June 29, 2003 5:56:11 PM

Thank you all for your reply. They have been helpful.

I think I'll change it back to the GF4 440 MX (4x AGP) since its a newer technology. The other reason being, the GF2 Ti has a fan, whose *extra* noice is quite irritating. I suppose the GF4 don't need a fan because they designed it to be more efficient in heat dissipating?

I would further explain on the 'compatibility problem'. After I installed Win XP, I then installed the driver which came in a CD togather with the GF4. After installing the driver, I could not get into Win XP at all. The computer just went blank after the Win XP loading page.
I suspected a corrupted driver, so I went online to get the latest Detonator 4.4.03 Driver.( this whole process was terrible....reinstalling Windows, 18MB downloading on a 56k dial-up line etc....I wouldn't got through it again) and things became 'normal' after that.

However due to inexperience, I later crashed the whole system, and so in the end decided to let the vendor reinstall the whole system for me. He must have reformatted the whole HD, and reinstalled Win XP for me....and got the same blank screen problem when installing the GPU driver. *MAYBE* that's the 'imcompatibility problem' he meant.

I think its just a faulty driver. What do you ppl think?

>>Rubberband, here in my place where the I have to multiply my currency by 4x US$, the Radeon 9500 is quite out of my reach:) 

cec
!