GF4MX vs GF3Ti

[frozentax]

In all of the benchmarks I've seen, the GeForce3 Ti200 64MB outperforms any of the GeForce4 MX 64/128mb combos. Newegg sells a GF3Ti200 64mb board for $74, and a GF4MX440 128mb for $60. What would be the advantage to buying the GF4MX, if any, instead of the GF3Ti?

Thanks,
-Anthony

 

[Rogozhin]

There isn't

I just suggested that a fellow purchase a geforce 3 ti200 over an g4mx and he didn't understand why a geforce 4 would be slower than a geforce 3.

Bad PR on nvidia's part to do that but at least he asked and didn't get burned 😉


rogo

 

[Harabecw]

GF4MX is like a GF2 ultra in performance. forget about it.

 

[xSauronx]

of course
for only around $6 more they have the radoen 9100 128(i wont go into the specs, theyre all over this place, just search), which should run somewhat faster unless you have something against ati cards

 

[Pete]

The GF4MX will probably have better signal quality and may have more output options (for dual head). But the GF3 will be faster.

 

[Goi]

The GF4MX will also have better FSAA features, although it will probably not be fast enough to use them. It also has much better video hardware for DVD assist, even better than the GF4 Ti series. I'm not sure if the GF FX series has "caught up" but I'm guessing they have.

 

[Ionizer86]

64mb Radeon 9100 for $65 @ Newegg. This card is between a GF3 Ti500 and a GF4 Ti4200.