Geforce3 vs. Geforce4, and some general questions

[Yohhan]

I have a few random questions for anyone who has a minute to answer them. Feel free to be as technical as you'd like with the answers. I'd actually prefer it that way.

1) First off, what's the difference between a geforce3 and a geforce4? Does it just have to do with clock speeds? Where can I find out what they are?

2) Second, can a PCI video card ever be better than an AGP card considering the PCI bus is only 33 mhz?

3) I have a Geforce3 ti200 and a Geforce4 MX420 (using dual monitors). I'm using AGP 4. How can I numerically compare the performance of these two cards? I don't want to get into actually benchmarking them. I just want to compare their numbers so to speak.

4) I think my mobo supports AGP 8. How can I tell if my card works at AGP 8? What do I have to check?


If anyone could provide some links for further reading, I'd greatly appreciate that as well. Thanks for your time.

 

[AnAndAustin]

1. There are 2 completely diff types of GF4. The GF4MX which are enhanced GF2 cards and far inferior in 3D to the GF3. The GF4TI cards are enhanced GF3, they are more efficient thus faster and improve: image quality, AA, dual display, TVout/VIVO and they also make the most of even the fastest CPUs. As for the clocks of these cards:

GF3TI200 175/400
GF3 (standard) 200/460
GF3TI500 240/500
GF4TI4200 64MB 250/500
GF4TI4200 128MB 250/444
GF4TI4200-8X 250/500
GF4TI4400 275/550
GF4TI4600 300/650

2. Well the PCI bus has other limitations such as sharing with other devices, lack of system RAM access and advanced AGP features such as fast writes. A card going from AGP to PCI typicly loses about 20% perf. So a GF4MX440 64MB PCI will be about 20% slower than the same card in AGP form BUT even so will be faster and more preferable than a GF2MX200 64MB AGP.

3. Well both use AGP4x but the GF4MX use SDR RAM, clocks at 300/220 and is based on GF2 DX7 technology while the GF3TI200 uses DDR RAM, clocks at 175/400 and is based upon the much better DX8 technology. The GF4MX have much better image quality and slightly enhanced TVout/VIVO and also incorporate dual RAMDACs enabling dual display functionality. The GF3TI200 is hugely faster for gaming.

4. AGP8x will only be found on the newest mobos and uses the AGP3.0 standard, most cards use the AGP2.0 standard and AGP4x. The actual perf diff between AGP8x and AGP4x is VERY small, so AGP8x is largely about future potential and marketing than anything else. A tool like SiSoft Sandra can help but the easiest sources are the manual that came with your mobo and the website of the manu or chipset of your mobo.

 

[Yohhan]

Thanks!

I've been overclocking my 64 mb GF3 ti200 lately. So if I were able to get it up to 250/500, how would its performance compare to a GF4TI4200 64MB 250/500?

 

[AnAndAustin]

A GF3TI200 @ 250/500 (TI500=240/500) wouldn't be far away from a GF4TI4200 128MB at 250/444 or 64MB at 250/500 and the slower your CPU the smaller the diffs. However the 4200 would o/c to about 300/550 and 300/600 respectively which is even faster than a GF4TI4400 let alone a GF3TI500. Additionally there are other things a GF3 still won't possess such as sharp image quality, dual display, slightly enhanced TVout/VIVO, slightly enhanced AA and the ability to still gain even on the top CPUs. Even so a GF3TI500 is more than capable of playing all current games very well and anybody with a card of this calibre would be wiser to wait 3-6 months to see how the market develops. We should see Rad9500, Rad9700-DDRII, NV30 and a few others too, even if they aren't all they're cracked up to be prices will still fall.

Here's a good recent link showing a range of cards inc GF3TI500 (GF3TI200 @ 240/500) and GF4TI4200 both 64MB and 128MB:

Tech Report Rad9000pro review (inc GF4TI, Rad8500/LE, GF3, GF4MX440/460 & Rad7500)

And Here's another good link:

GotApex Visiontek 4200-128 (vs 4400 4600 3TI200 3TI500 2TI R7500 R8500 4MX440)