eVGA GeForce 4 MX440

I just bought a GF4 MX440 by eVGA and it doesn't seem to work in my Gigabyte GA-7VTXH+ I tried it in several machines with this board and it didn't work in any of them.

I replased it and the same issue arrizes. I don't have another board to try it in at the time, so does anyone know if there is an incompatability issue please tell me. Thanks.

BTW, I think that I will be putting an ASUS GF4 MX440 in a week, so do you think I'll have better luck?


P.S. Check my Bio for my full system specs.

-<font color=green><i>Kanaz</i></font color=green>
10 answers Last reply
More about evga geforce mx440
  1. I also have had problems with my evga geforce 440. My monitor goes black when playing certain games (Croc 2), but the whole game except the monitor seems to keep on working fine (sound, keyboard, mouse, cdrom, disk, etc.)
    After much investigating (debugging with my old working GF2MX card and its original drivers and talking to eVGA, etc.), the problem seems to be with the drivers that are out currently for the GF4 MX440). I am waiting for the next release of drivers from nVidia.
  2. Hi,
    I have tried a Sparkle Geforce 4 MX440 in a QDI PlatiniX 2D motherboard. They are not compatible. I am lead to believe that there is a power supply problem with all Nvidia Geforce 4 chipsets which makes them incompatible with several motherboards.

    I tried it in a QDI KudoZ Mobo and at least it started up.

    I think that there is probably a large problem with the new Nvidia chipset.

    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars
  3. I STRONGLY suggest you return any GeForce 4 MX card(s) you've purchased and get MX completely out of your head. For around the same price you can get a Radeon 8500 or a GeForce 3 Ti200. Both cards are alot better than the MX 440. I suggest you do some research. I just couldnt live with myself if i didnt do everything in my power to stop someone from buying those overpriced pieces of $**t. As far as the Ti 200 vs the R8500, id say go with the R, but both are good choices. Please take my advice, and please, other people who agree with me, post your agreement.

    its not that intel CANT make a good processor, its that they just dont try
  4. hehe, I completely agree with Willamette in this case. The GF4 MX is basically a GF2MX with faster more efficient RAM, and a slightly faster core, that's it. Get a Radeon 8500 as it can compete with the GF4Ti series in OpenGL now, and soon in D3D too. For example, the R8500 can now match the GF4Ti4600 in Serious Sam under OpenGl.

    AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
  5. I'm pleased to know I'm not the only sane person on this forum, but AMD_Man, PLEASE, shutup about the R8500. It can compete with the GeForce 3 Ti500. In no way is it comparable to the GeForce 4 Ti 4600, not even the 4400. Read the damn specs dude! It just dosn't compare. You say it wins in Open GL Serious Sam, please direct me to this info because i dont believe it. But even if it did beat the Ti4600 in that ONE bm i still dont care. The Ti4600 is the best graphics card BY FAR!!! Besides the R8500 is not the only card that gets driver updates!!! do you think the Ti500 dosnt have new driver updates since its release that improve its performance!!! I think youre just trying to push the R8500 because its the card you have, so you refuse to admit the Ti4600 is significantly better. In everything. Period. The end.

    its not that intel CANT make a good processor, its that they just dont try
  6. Ohh, is that so? I know the Ti4600 is better but ATI is releasing drivers like crazy nowadays with performance boosts all over the place. The Ti500 hasn't gotten any good driver updates since its release. The GF3Ti500 is based on the GF3 so you were getting quite mature drivers from the start. Look at nexus' post about the the R8500 near the Ti4600 performance in his post. That's using older and much slower drivers. The new 6043/9017 drivers give you up to 40% in overall FPS under OpenGL.

    At this moment in time, the Ti500 is behind the R8500. The R8500 should be comparable to the Ti4200 with the current drivers.

    I don't refuse to admit anything. Also, if you want me to "read the specs" then based on the specs, the R8500 should match or exceed the GF4 Ti4400. I suggest YOU read the specs.

    Also, I'm beginning to work on my own tweak utility to make the most out of the R8500. It will be able to automatically download the latest drivers for you, optimize them, and allow you to choose between "best quality" or "best performance". I have only begun it today, so don't expect any screenshots for a few days, and a beta for at least a week or two.

    I've implemented similar AutoUpdate features in my other programs so importing the features into my new app shouldn't take too long.

    AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
  7. I have read the specs, maybe you should REREAD the specs. Besides, no one cares about Open GL. When Open GL 2.0 starts to become widely used, then you can strut that around. But D3D performance is more important.

    its not that intel CANT make a good processor, its that they just dont try
  8. I know the specs quite well. Hmm, D3D performance is not necessarily more important. There are probably an equal number of OpenGL and D3D games out there. What does that have to do with OpenGL 2.0?

    As a side note, previous Giants D3D slow performance is now gone. The R8500 should outperform at least the Ti500 in Giants now. UT has been improved but it's still significantly faster under OpenGL than D3D.

    AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
  9. DirectX 8 chips
    GeForce3 GeForce3 Ti 200
    (again) GeForce3 Ti 500
    (again) Radeon 8500
    Pipelines 4 4 4 4
    (per pipeline) 2 2 2 2
    Chip clock
    (mc/s) 200 175 240 275
    Filling rate
    (GPixel) 0,8 0,7 1,0 1,1
    Filling rate
    (GTexel) 1,6 1,4 1,9 2,2
    INTERFACE (bit) 128 GDR 128 GDR 128 GDR 128 GDR
    Storing ATS
    (mc/s) 230 200 250 275
    (GB/sec.) 6,9 6,0 7,5 8,2
    Sizes of (MB) 64 64 64 64
    T & L
    Unit DirectX 7/8 DirectX 7/8 DirectX 7/8 DirectX 7/8
    Shader yes yes yes yes
    Shader (v1.3) (v1.3) (v1.3) (v1.4)
    Feature Lightspeed MEMORY Architecture Lightspeed MEMORY Architecture Lightspeed MEMORY Architecture HyperZ II
    Types Multi Sampling, Quincunx Multi Sampling, Quincunx Multi Sampling, Quincunx adaptive FSAA
    TwinView /
    HydraVision no no no yes

    Source: http://www.3dcenter.de/artikel/2001/09-30b.php

    In case you can't read it, the cards are listed above and the specs list in order as they are listed above.
    So the fourth number (or set) is the 8500.

    TI500 easily loses to the R8500. Now I'm off to search for the 4400 specs.

    Sorry but I thought I'd put some hussle in this arguement and make this a more black and white issue rather than repeating which card we think has better specs..?

    "dude your getting a dell", is that kid trying to say he wants to stick his 'dell' in you?
  10. TI4200 specs
    Bandwidth 8000MB/s
    Theoretical Fill 900MPixels/s
    No Twinview
    No Truform (or equivalent)
    PS 1.3

    4400 specs
    Bandwidth 8800MB/s
    Theoretical Fill 1100Mpixels/s
    No Twinview
    No Truform (or equivalent)
    PS 1.3

    R8500 specs
    core 275/mem 550
    Bandwidth 8200MB/s
    Theoretical Fill 1000Mpixel/s (2.4 for the 128mb version?)
    Includes Hydravision Dual Monitor Support (includes tv out, and digital video out)
    Includes Truform
    PS 1.4


    Looks like the R8500 easily trumps the 4200 while it will be a good match for the 4400 once you consider that the radeon can do in 1 pass what the nvidia takes many.

    Please correct my mistakes. This was a learning experience for me! I did not know the R8500 stands this well even up against teh GF4.

    I'm impressed. I'd have to shout my vote in favor of AMD Mans arguement in this one.
    Consider all the "extra's", the superior performance of the 8500 over the TI500 and the PRICE, you have a no contest.

    Hydravision, PS1.4 and truform shouldnt be considered that, if your competition has something you dont for less money, its not an extra but rather something you are lacking.

    "dude your getting a dell", is that kid trying to say he wants to stick his 'dell' in you?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kinney on 03/09/02 10:00 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards EVGA Geforce Graphics Product