• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

GeForce TI 4200 "Golden Sample" & OC questions

D

dxkj

Lifer
Not sure why I got the Golden Sample, but for the price different getting faster ram seemed like a good trade off.

I overclocked it earlier and got 300/600 stable, but when i updated drivers it had trouble even running at the 270/570 its *guaranteeD* to run at IE completely lockups and screen going colorfully fuzzy.

what is the typical overclock on a non-Golden sample board? when I had it running at 300/600 it was outperforming the average TI 4600 in the 3dmark database
 
😱 The Gainward non-Golden Samples tned to suck BUT basicly any other manu's std cheap card should o/c as well as the GS Gainward cards ... Gainward make their std cards pretty crappy in order to make the GS ones look better than they really are. The basic AGP4x 4200 cards tend to hit 300/550 (128MB) or 300/600 (64MB) while the 4200-8X_128MB should also hit 300/600. Have you tried the older drivers again?
 
I went back to the drivers windows defaults with, and I got an overclock of 320/630 with no artifacts, as soon as i installed the new drivers from nvidia it locks up and screws everything up again... even at 250/500 speeds


any suggestions on "good" drivers for this card for XP?
 
ok completely cleared out all the old pieces of the drivers and reinstalled 41.09 and it seems to be running great.

7500 3dMarks on a 900mhz 100FSB Athlon

running stable at 320/635
 
sounds like the drivers were screwed up.

Just a note that I had a BFG Ti4200 128MB that ran at 300/560 ok and I run an MSI Ti4200 64MB at 300/600 no problem (goes higher but I like the nice round numbers 😉 ).
 
😱 dxkj your CPU is a VERY substantial bottleneck for your gfx card. At 900mhz there isn't any significant diff between Rad9000PRO, Rad8500, Rad9100, Rad9500, GF3, GF4TI4200, TI4400 or TI4600 ... heck even a GF2TI, GF4MX, Rad7500 or Rad9000 wouldn't be a whole lot slower. Save up your pennies for a faster CPU, in the meantime stick on 2xAA & 8xAF to help use up some of the wasted gfx card power. Have you benched the diff between stock and 320/635 as I bet it isn't very much.
 
My new computer is almost all here, I was just putting the card in my older system to test out its power, IE how far i could overclock it, and work out any driver problems ahead of time since i would be using XP on both


Jump is from 7150 stock to 7498 at that overclock

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top