I am still using a Geforce 2 Ti 500, it is plenty fast at 290/521. When any of my games don't play fast enough I'll upgrade. Plus I used the resistor mod to turn it into a Quadro, if I upgrade to Geforce 3 or 4 professional video apps will actually run slower. I got someone that had an overclocked Geforce 3 Ti 200 to run 3DMark 2001, with the three tests disabled that my Geforce 2 chipset is not allowed to complete. His score was 12% higher at the default benchmark. Wow, what a amazing increase, I'm can't live without a Geforce 3! Not to mention if I really am really desperate for speed I get the exact same performance as any Geforce 3 at the same clock speed using 16-bit color, though it is not likely any Geforce 3 can reach a 290MHz core speed.
So while buying a new Geforce 3 Ti 200 is a great deal at $140 with better performance, someone opting to buy a real cheap Geforce 2 Ti is getting a better bang for the buck, and still able to handle any games out there with ease. And there is the option of modding to a Quadro 2 Pro and getting better results in professional graphics apps for people that actually use their computer for work. Anyway, if you do a little reading, the Geforce 4 MX 440 (besides 3DMark 2001) is slower in all gaming benchmarks and costs more, good suggestion! The Geforce 4 MX 460 is faster but costs $20 more than the Geforce 3 Ti 200. Thanks for crapping lepper boy's thread with some valuable input.