GF4 Ti4200 Review... let's discuss!

[endless_n00b]

Just posted today:

<A HREF="http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q2/geforce4-ti4200/index.x?pg=1" target="_new">
NVIDIA's GeForce4 Ti 4200
</A>

Lets discuss. For me, its exactly what I expected/hoped for: the new price/performance leader. And its nice to see that it "overclocked like a mofo" right up to stock 4400 levels rock stable.

Interesting was the 128meg version had slightly slower memory speed (444) than the 64meg (500). But as they said, this keeps the price down, and the performance between the 64 and the 128 was neck and neck anyway. Like in the Commanche 4 tests, sometimes more is better.

----
A newbie is only a newbie for as long as you allow him to be.
-Anonymous Veteran

 

[Guest]

The BEST thing to discuss about the article is that Nvidia decided to scrap the Geforce 4 MX 460!!!

Nvidia doesn't need another MX card right now IMHO. It seems too, that according to the scores that the GF4 Ti 4200 fits in the market nicely. Not as pricey as the bigger bros but performs better than any of the GF3 series and as you and the article stated, it can be overclocked like a mofo!

For the price at $179 (64mb) and $199 (128mb) it will fit in the market nicely.

J

 

[endless_n00b]

heh, yeah I agree. I never understood the point of the MX460. I distinctly recall thinking "who the hell would buy one of those when they could get a Ti4200 for about the same money?!" Glad it got pulled.

----
A newbie is only a newbie for as long as you allow him to be.
-Anonymous Veteran

 

[pr497]

right now...it seems to make more sense to buy the 64mb ti4200 than the 128mb ti4200...its odd why nvidia increased memory size but decreased speed...to cut down costs perhaps?

<b><font color=red>ATI</font color=red>'s drivers are like a broken faucet, they both keep on leaking...</b>

 

[bront]

Lets discuss. For me, its exactly what I expected/hoped for: the new price/performance leader. And its nice to see that it "overclocked like a mofo" right up to stock 4400 levels rock stable.

You will get some dropoff in performance in AA and high end games at hi-res with the 64 MB OCed though, and the 128 probably won't overclock as far. Also, you void your waranty when you OC, so there is something to be said for stock speeds.

Interesting was the 128meg version had slightly slower memory speed (444) than the 64meg (500). But as they said, this keeps the price down, and the performance between the 64 and the 128 was neck and neck anyway. Like in the Commanche 4 tests, sometimes more is better.

With only a $20 difference in price, they had to go with cheeper memory.

Interesting that the 8500 was pretty darn close in many apps to the 4200. It's still a decient buy, and the didn't use the 6045 or 6052 drivers, which do fix a few tweeks that they mentioned.

So, you realy now have 2 video cards that perform very close to eachother for a similar price in the 8500 and the 4200. Once you get production verisons, a good review of them head to head in stock and OCed varieties would be great. It's nice to have 2 nicely matched cards on the market, should drive prices down more.

Just a note, they got it to OC at 300/290(580), most of the retail 8500s have been able to OC to 300/300(600) easily too, as have the retail 8500LE 128s.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!