$65 dollar credit - GF2 Ti or GF4 MX440?

[Heisenberg]

I've got a credit at newegg because my GF2 burned up. Should I get one just like it (GF2 Ti 64M DDR) or get a GF4 MX440 64M DDR instead? I realize the MX series are the entry-level cards for the GF4, and Ti were higher for the GF2's, but I'm thinking an entry-level GF4 is still better than a GF2. Comparing the numbers given on nvidia.com they seem pretty similar, but I'm assuming the GF4 GPU is more powerful.

 

[AnAndAustin]

The GF4MX cards are MUCH better than the GF2 cards but still considerably worse in pure 3D perf than GF3. The GF4MX440 is a fair bit faster than GF2TI and also has the GF4 enhancements which are much better image quality, dual display, TVout/VIVO and hw DVD playback! No doubt at all GF4MX440 is much better in every dept than GF2TI. You should consider Rad9000 which sports the advantages GF4MX have over GF2 but ALSO adds full DX8 hw and gives pure 3D perf almost equivilent to GF3. Rad9000 is much better than GF4MX cards, the Rad9000PRO is about 20% faster than the std Rad9000 while the Rad8500LE is faster than them all and in turn is 10% slower than Rad8500. Rad8500 give 3D perf about equal to GF3 (just lacking AA like Rad9000) but once again the Rads have the extra GF4 type enhancements. So in short GF4MX440 is MUCH better than all GF2, Rad9000 is much better than GF4MX, Rad8500LE is much better than Rad9000 and even Rad9000PRO. HTH!

 

[Heisenberg]

That pretty much covers it. Thanks.

 

[Brian48]

I'm not crazy about either card. Don't they have anything else within that price range that you want? Maybe a 8500LE?

 

[Heisenberg]

Originally posted by: Brian48
I'm not crazy about either card. Don't they have anything else within that price range that you want? Maybe a 8500LE?

No, not really. I've had good experience so far with Nvidia, so I want to stay with them.

 

[novice]

Maybe you could scrape up an additional $25 and go for a Chaintech Geforce 3 Ti200, which is better than either of the cards you listed. It actually supports the latest direct X features and is decently fast. I have a couple of the Visiontek versions and have been very pleased with the performance vs. the old geforce 2 GTS/Pro cards.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
The GF4MX cards are MUCH better than the GF2 cards but still considerably worse in pure 3D perf than GF3. The GF4MX440 is a fair bit faster than GF2TI and also has the GF4 enhancements which are much better image quality, dual display, TVout/VIVO and hw DVD playback! No doubt at all GF4MX440 is much better in every dept than GF2TI. You should consider Rad9000 which sports the advantages GF4MX have over GF2 but ALSO adds full DX8 hw and gives pure 3D perf almost equivilent to GF3. Rad9000 is much better than GF4MX cards, the Rad9000PRO is about 20% faster than the std Rad9000 while the Rad8500LE is faster than them all and in turn is 10% slower than Rad8500. Rad8500 give 3D perf about equal to GF3 (just lacking AA like Rad9000) but once again the Rads have the extra GF4 type enhancements. So in short GF4MX440 is MUCH better than all GF2, Rad9000 is much better than GF4MX, Rad8500LE is much better than Rad9000 and even Rad9000PRO. HTH!

I disagree with you about the Radeon 9000 being much better than the GF4MX440, I have both and there's quite a few games which the GF4MX440 delivers better performance than the Radeon 9000:-

Mercedes Benz Truck Racing, Comanche4, Max Payne, Serious Sam, Star Trek Elite Force, Star Wars Jedi Knight 2 and UT2003, I'm sure there's others too but I can't remember them.

The Radeon 9000 is a better video card technically with strong pixel shader performance for example. However from my experience with it you might get totally amazing performance with one game and then try another less demanding game and it's performance is very poor.

If it's a straight choice between a GF2 Ti and a GF4 MX440 then get the GF4 MX440. I'd go for something abit more future proof and if they sell the Radeon 9000 Pro version then get that instead because it's currently the best budget video card available.

 

[Mem]

If it's a straight choice between a GF2 Ti and a GF4 MX440 then get the GF4 MX440.

I agree,also the image quality on the GF4 cards has improved quite a lot.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Unfortunately reviews of the standard Rad9000 cards have been lacking but they are identical other than clock speeds and hence Rad9000 should be about 20% slower than Rad9000PRO. Rad9000PRO is hugely better than GF4MX460 but I understand the std Rad9000 is pretty even in pure 3D perf to a GF4MX440 and that diffs vary quite a bit by the particular game in question. However all GF4MX cards lack any kind of DX8 hw which is becoming very significant, after all they are based on the same type of 2 year old technology as Rad7500. Rad9000 should o/c to about Rad9000PRO speeds and even at stock I'd rec it over the GF4MX440 simply because perf and features are about even until you factor in GF4MX's DX7 vs Rad9000's DX8. It is give and take, but I don't think it's wise to miss out on DX8 hw.

The top cards to go for in that price range are undoubtedly the Rad9000PRO or Rad8500LE, 128MB if you can get them cheap enough. GF3TI200 cards are still fine and offer Rad8500 type 3D speeds and DX8 hw but are greatly let down by poor image quality, no dual display, poor TVout and no hw DVD playback ... how important those things are to a user will vary but if a Rad8500 is the same price it is a wiser buy IMHO. A lot does depend on the exact prices where ever you are buyng from, Rad9000PRO or Rad8500LE would be my recs while GF3 aren'y bad and certainly hugely better in 3D than the GF4MX cards.

 

[Goi]

If those are your only 2 choices, then I'd choose the GF4MX440. newegg has the Chaintech/EVGA GF4MX440 for just $66/$69, and the Gainward/Albatron GF4MX440 for just $73/74, but I'm using a Abit Siluro GF4MX440 in my dad's system. You can't really get a Radeon 9000 Pro or Radeon 8500LE for anywhere near that price at newegg.com, so those suggestions are pretty much out of the question.

 

[bulldawg]

Originally posted by: Heisenberg

Originally posted by: Brian48
I'm not crazy about either card. Don't they have anything else within that price range that you want? Maybe a 8500LE?

No, not really. I've had good experience so far with Nvidia, so I want to stay with them.

Don't blame you for that. I've tried to give ATI a chance, but driver hassles/problems with the two cards I bought have turned me completely against them.

 

[vanderStoep]

Why don`t you think about a gf 3 ti 200? That about $20 more
To me that sounds like a good improvement for a reasonable amount.


Some benchmarks:


http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1647&p=14

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1583&p=10

gf 3 ti 200> gf 4 mx > gf 2 ti

 

[AnAndAustin]

GF3 certainly offer hugely better 3D perf, Aniso, AA and DX8 hw ... but GF4MX are much better in terms of image quality, dual display, TVout and hw DVD playback. If those latter things are important or you're hugely strapped for cash then GF4MX is still worth considering. It is a shame to dismiss ATI as the Rad8500/9000 type cards offer GF3 level 3D perf, Aniso, DX8 hw, image quality, dual display, TVout and hw DVD playback, so you get the benefits of both the GF3 and GF4MX cards. When going Radeon you do want to check clock speeds and things like dual display as this can vary between manu and retail/oem/bulk too ... even so worst case tends to be 10% slower perf and no dual display!