For those on a budget, the gf4 4200 has no future! Only 20fps on MaxPayne2 with everything maxxed

[JEDI]

According to FRAPS, i'm only getting 15-20 FPS at Chapter1 (warehouse). That's using 1280x1024x32bits 2xQ AA/8xAF and everything else maxed.

For those on a budget, you would want the best price/performance card. But that means you would want one that you estimate will play games 12months from now at a decent rate so you don't have to buy a new card next year. Cause if u have to buy another card next year, then the card u just bought obviously isn't best bang for the buck since u got spend more $. And it's cheaper to have a card last 2 years than buy a cheap card every year that's able to handle the bells/whistles.

So a gf4 is NOT the way to go. it'll play today's games decently if u turn down some of the bells/whistles, but will be outdated next year (ie: HL2).

Thus i would suggest the 9600np for $70 on Black Friday if u MUST get a card NOW. Else wait a week b4 HL2 comes out to upgrade your video card. (Probably a 5900nu for ~$125 at the rate the price for this card is dropping.)

And obviously, if you dont care about resolution/bells/whistles then ignore this post and continue playing with your gf2 GTS 32meg

 

[McArra]

You could try running it at 1600x1200 8xAA/8xAF

You should know GF4s are not good for AA and AF, but they are very good without it. Be realistic.

 

[ThreeEagles]

I would use your exact logic to argue that people should wait until games like HL2 are actually *OUT* to get the best bang for their buck. You really think that a 9600NP is the card of the future?

I just upgraded from a Geforce 2 GTS this week, BTW

 

[thenerdguy]

Thats wrong. Gforce4 mx 440 at 1280X1024X32 with 4XAA/4xAF runs at 32fps
Yeah its not DX9 but 8 looks good too.
whats the rest of your system specs?

 

[deadseasquirrel]

I used a GF4 4200, maxed everything out, but ran at 1600x1200 with no aa/af (everyone knows gf4s don't do those settings worth a crap). It looks beautiful and runs at a decent frame rate. Got slowdowns on one of the later chapters where there's a lot of fire. But it was still highly playable and looked amazing at that res.

 

[modedepe]

Of course a ti4200 won't play it with 2xaa and 8x af one. Turning those on kills a ti4200. The game runs fine for me though with those off. Clearly if you want aa and af you shouldn't be buying a gf4 to run today's games.

 

[JEDI]

Originally posted by: ThreeEagles
I would use your exact logic to argue that people should wait until games like HL2 are actually *OUT* to get the best bang for their buck. You really think that a 9600NP is the card of the future?

Yup, thats why i said if u HAD TO UPGRADE NOW, the 9600np for $70 is best. As for HL@, i would wait till they announce HL2 went Gold b4 even looking for a new card. Else you're just wasting your time.

modedepe said:
Of course a ti4200 won't play it with 2xaa and 8x af on. Turning those on kills a ti4200. The game runs fine for me though with those off. Clearly if you want aa and af you shouldn't be buying a gf4 to run today's games.

well, not clearly. I (and alot of other people based on the msgs in this (Video) forum) thought the 4200 would run ALL of today's game at ~25fps with 2xAA.

And i would have said the 9600np for $70 is THE best bang for the buck if HL2 wasn't delayed.

 

[McArra]

4200Ti blows 9600np without AA/AF. And nobody here ever said GF4s work fast with AA/AF. It isn't a card to play with filters, but to play with out them at a very good framerate, the best in the budget market + it overclocks quite well to 4600Ti speeds making it even a better purchase. It's not fair what you say, It's like saying 9700Pro is crap because it can't manage to run HL2 @1600x1200 2xAA/16xAF. If you want AA/AF then go for a 9500pro at least, but don't say 4200Ti is a bad card when it is the best in the budget range.

 

[Evdawg]

?????????

budget video cards arent meant to run games with AA and AF with new games.... its common sense for crying out loud.. As Mcarra said... be realistic

 

[Atlantean]

Well then don't run it with everything maxed out till you get a new one.

 

[Rage187]

um duh?

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: JEDI
According to FRAPS, i'm only getting 15-20 FPS at Chapter1 (warehouse). That's using 1280x1024x32bits 2xQ AA/8xAF and everything else maxed.

For those on a budget, you would want the best price/performance card. But that means you would want one that you estimate will play games 12months from now at a decent rate so you don't have to buy a new card next year. Cause if u have to buy another card next year, then the card u just bought obviously isn't best bang for the buck since u got spend more $. And it's cheaper to have a card last 2 years than buy a cheap card every year that's able to handle the bells/whistles.

So a gf4 is NOT the way to go. it'll play today's games decently if u turn down some of the bells/whistles, but will be outdated next year (ie: HL2).

Thus i would suggest the 9600np for $70 on Black Friday if u MUST get a card NOW. Else wait a week b4 HL2 comes out to upgrade your video card. (Probably a 5900nu for ~$125 at the rate the price for this card is dropping.)

And obviously, if you dont care about resolution/bells/whistles then ignore this post and continue playing with your gf2 GTS 32meg

Are you motarded? You have 8x AF on. If you expected to run that type of game with those settings, you're an idiot.

1024x768x32 with all details on and 2x AA is probably quite feasible and looks quite good.

Some of you people...

 

[jiffylube1024]

Everybody knows that the GF4's (and below) have terrible performance with AF. Personally, I never turn AF on on my GF4. Why cut the framerate by 50% for some minor improvement. Or even stupider is 2xAF or 4xAF - that's like a 25% performance hit for pretty much nothing.

Leave AF off and either run at 1024 w/ AA on or 1280 w/ AF off (I usually run at this setting).

Try Max Payne 2 at 1280X960 with no AA or AF - it should run very well.

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Everybody knows that the GF4's (and below) have terrible performance with AF. Personally, I never turn AF on on my GF4. Why cut the framerate by 50% for some minor improvement. Or even stupider is 2xAF or 4xAF - that's like a 25% performance hit for pretty much nothing.

Leave AF off and either run at 1024 w/ AA on or 1280 w/ AF off (I usually run at this setting).

Try Max Payne 2 at 1280X960 with no AA or AF - it should run very well.

What driver are you using? Ever since 41.09 I've gotten 2xAA and Quincunx AA for basically free. At 1024x768, 2xAA is all you need to kill remaining jaggies.

 

[Keysplayr]

Uh oh, I see what's happening here. Jedi will only listen to the wrong people in this forum. Jedi, if you don't take the word of members like Jiffylube, you're gonna get nowhere fast. Is all this because your still cheesed off that your Ti4200 with 64 MB is short of the 78 required by max payne2 like you said in numerous threads? Who's fault is that? Nvidia's? Nope it's yours. You make the decision on a vid card ultimately. Not others. You bought it, you deal with it.
If you buy a 9600np, You'll be crapping on that one in mere weeks that it cant play any better than your Ti. Then where will you go? Volari?

Out of the cards that are currently being produced, the 9600np is the worst card you can purchase next to a 5200....

 

[policy11]

Jumping on the JEDI is dumb and spiteful bandwagon.

 

[xSkyDrAx]

My radeon 9600 'pro' 256mb (400/200) runs max payne 2, according to fraps, at 60-70fps with 4xAA and aniso filtering @ 1024. I consider my card a np even though it has a 400mhz core. Does the extra 100mhz core make a bigger impact than a 100mhz mem?

and my point of saying that? Well since most people say that the ti4200 is equal or better than a 9600np w/o aa/af, then he should be getting much better fps though 16x AF...eh...

 

[Naruto]

JEEEZ, geforce 4 ti4200 is meant for 1024x768 x 32bit (no AA/AF) or even 1280x1024x 32bit (no AA/AF) for some of todays new games. You can also try to max out the game detail as well and still get decent frames.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

"OMG, my year-old card doesn't run the latest games at cranked quality" ...

Dumbass.

1024x768x32bpp, 2xAF runs like a champ.

- M4H

 

[chsh1ca]

M4H, it has been more than a year at this point, but you are definitely correct.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Insomniak

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Everybody knows that the GF4's (and below) have terrible performance with AF. Personally, I never turn AF on on my GF4. Why cut the framerate by 50% for some minor improvement. Or even stupider is 2xAF or 4xAF - that's like a 25% performance hit for pretty much nothing.

Leave AF off and either run at 1024 w/ AA on or 1280 w/ AF off (I usually run at this setting).

Try Max Payne 2 at 1280X960 with no AA or AF - it should run very well.

What driver are you using? Ever since 41.09 I've gotten 2xAA and Quincunx AA for basically free. At 1024x768, 2xAA is all you need to kill remaining jaggies.

I'm going to have to test this out. Results pending .

 

[JackHawksmoor]

Yeah, the Geforce 4 is still fine for todays games. I bought mine at the begining of the year for a pretty good price, and I still think it was a pretty good purchase. Probably the best deal I could have made at the time.

Luckily I don't use or care about AA anyway. I don't think it looks particularly better or worse, so even if it was free I don't know that I'd use it. Same deal with anistropic filtering and trilinear filtering. I really can't tell a difference from bilinear in games, so...

I like high resolutions, and everything else cranked up (aside from AA and higher filtering), and the Geforce 4 still delivers pretty darned well in modern games.

Thats wrong. Gforce4 mx 440 at 1280X1024X32 with 4XAA/4xAF runs at 32fps Yeah its not DX9 but 8 looks good too.

The Geforce 4 MX isn't a Direct X 8 part, it's DX 7, basically a Geforce 2. I'm still using a 64MB Geforce 2 in one system, and even it is still not half bad for most modern games.