Radeon 7500 64DDR or Nvidia Geforce 4 MX440 64 DDR

[rApiDShoT]

I have two choices between Radeon 7500 64DDR and Nvidia Geforce 4 MX440 64 DDR.

One question: The Radeon can do the Vertex shader and others right? it supports all the 3dmark2001 features right?

Anyways, In most cases I see that the Geforce 4 MX440 ususally beats the Radeon 7500

So what card do you think is a better buy?

I don't use high resoultion, maybe the most at 1024*768, and I am not big on 16 bit color and 32bit or even the high details or low details

Pls post your opinions!!

 

[spanky]

the ati is a better overall card. the gf4 mx is a better gaming card. depends what u want from ur video card.

 

[Flatline]

What are the prices? You might want to consider a 64Mb Radeon 8500 as well....

 

[rApiDShoT]

The Radeon 8500 is too expensive for me.

I was using a Geforce 2 MX 32mb SDR and it was ok. I was totally upset when I found out it was clocked at 143/166 for some reason. Isn't that the speed for a MX200?

I think I am still going to go with a Geforce 4 MX440 for gaming purpose because I am not a image quality person...

Unless some opinions turn things around..

I was very happy with the constant updates for Nvidia cards and sometimes the performance boost

 

[rApiDShoT]

Also, since I was using a SDR video card, the switch to DDR will make a significant performance boost right?

 

[Rand]

One question: The Radeon can do the Vertex shader and others right? it supports all the 3dmark2001 features right?

The R7500 will not support all DX8 features in hardware, and it does not have DX8 compatible pixel and vertex shaders. The same is true for the GF4 MX440, neither cards will fully support DX8.
The R7500 does have a marginally better 3D feature set, but the differences are minimal.

In most cases in current games the GF4 MX440 is faster, but on the flip side of things the R7500 is a more well rounded board.
If you need better 2D visual quality, DVD playback*, TV-Out implementation etc.... then the R7500 would probably be a better fit for you.

If your primary reason for upgrading is for gaming purposes, the GF4 MX is usually faster with a few rare exceptions.

*Ironically, the GF4 MX actually posessed superior DVD decoding capabilities then the higher end GF4 Ti series.

 

[Flatline]

I would say that an 8500LE at about $100 is probably your best bet...it leaves both those cards in the dust.

 

[MithShrike]

I would go with a GeForce 3 Ti200. It has DX8 capabilities and can be easily overclocked. It's only about $85 USD here.

 

[Deeko]

Get a Radeon 8500 LE or GF3 of some sort....not too much more expensive but MUCH better.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: rApiDShoT
The Radeon 8500 is too expensive for me.

The 8500's available for around $100 US now, but if that's to pricey then the GF4 MX440 will give you a pretty decent performance boost over the GF2 MX.

 

[Insidious]

While I generally prefer Nvidia over ATI, I am uneasy with anything "MX".

Seems like they have never "dropped into systems" as easily as the other NVIDIA products.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Rand tells it perfectly.

Out of the 2 cards you gave neither does DX8 funcs. GF4MX440 does have much better AA though, very wise if you have a slower CPU or are limited in res by your monitor. Both have hw to aid DVD/MPEG playback and both have excellent image quality. The Radeon does have better VO though. What would the GF4MX440 cost you though, $70?

Both GF3TI200 and Radeon8500LE are great cards and at around $90 (Radeons are well overpriced outside US & Canada) are much better buys than Radeon7500 and GF4MX440 which don't do the DX8 funcs as said. The GF4MX440 is really an enhanced GF2TI/GTS with enhanced image quality, VO and AA. If money is really tight you could look out for the SiS Xabre 400 cards, they do DX8 and also beat the GF4MX440 nearly all the time. They are new and drivers will need to mature but they seem to be a much better buy than either of the 2 cards you listed.

All of these modern cards are as fast in 32bit as 16bit, so there's no need to run in 16bit (without getting too deep). My advice would be to get a Radeon8500LE personally, exceptional perf, image quality, features and VO, esp for the price!

 

[rApiDShoT]

My only wish is to get a Radeon 8500 or Gf3 or Gf4...

I am in Canada..some of these prices might be a bit different..

ATI Radeon 7500 64MB DDR Retail $148

ATI Radeon 8500 64MB DDR OEM $206

50 bucks more..I know there a bit diff..but it's the money issue..

ASUS V7700TI GeForce2 Ti Deluxe 32MB DDR $195

ASUS V8170 Magic GF4 64MB DDR w/ TV $139

ABIT Siluro GeForce4 MX-440 64MB w/ TV-Out $136

Weird..the Geforce 2 TI is still more than the Geforce 4 mx..

I am not a hardcore gamer...so I don't think it's needed for me to spend a lot for a video card..

So my choices are limited really..Gf4 mx or Radeon 7500...

 

[rApiDShoT]

If money is really tight you could look out for the SiS Xabre 400 cards, they do DX8 and also beat the GF4MX440 nearly all the time. They are new and drivers will need to mature but they seem to be a much better buy than either of the 2 cards you listed.

Do you have any benchmarks or something on these cards? I heard of them but I didn't really pay much attention..

 

[AnAndAustin]

If you're not a hrdcore gamer then you are unlikely to be worried about DX8 funcs, but they are very nice to have for the future. Based upon your prices (and bearing in mind I don't know the conversion rate as I'm in the UK) I would suggest you get the SiS Xabre 400 providing the price is right (and you can find one, they're very new). Otherwise it's a very close call between Radeon7500 and GF4MX440. Both have fantastic image quality and DVD playback. GF4MX440 has much better AA as well as generally better perf in most games, esp newer ones like UT2003. Radeon7500 has better VO. Since it's very close you may want to be more patriotic and go for a Radeon7500. The full Radeon8500 id even faster than the Radeon8500LE if you can get that for $206 you'd get very near to all but the AA perf of a GF4TI4200! Links and benchmarks to follow shortly.

 

[AnAndAustin]

I thought you said you had a PIII 800, but looking through the threads it doesn't seem you said, CPU would make a diff when it comes to deciding precisely which gfx card to go for. If you could post your CPU it would be very useful. Bear in mind that the following links are usually based upon high-end XP or P4 CPUs and as such the exact diff in CPU will vary, but it is still a good idea of what to expect.

AnAndTech showing how CPU speed effects many gfx cards (EXCELLENT)

TomsHW almost all gfx cards compared (AthlonXP2000+)

X-bit Labs GF4MX vs the rest (Axp1900+)

RivaStation GF2 & GF3 roundup (R7500=GF2GTS/TI, R8500=GF3 (diff CPUs))

DansData Xabre

Hexus Xabre

Firing Squad Xabre

 

[rApiDShoT]

I really want to consider a Xabre 400, but it's too early to buy one because the driver support isn't so great. But in most cases it did beat the Geforce 4 MX440.

Also I like the features of the card, the pixel shaders AGP 8X, it's not bad at all.

The only problem is time....I need to know the cost and if it is going to impact the Nvidia and ATI cards a lot.

I also heard it makes weird noises when it operates, that might be a hardware problem so I might have to wait for Xabre 600 or 800

At high res, the card doesn't work so great but that really isn't a problem because 1024*768 is the most really I'll go



Btw. Thanks for the links, where did u get P3 800mhz from? lol Just to tell you I do have a P3 800mhz...lol

 

[AnAndAustin]

I must be psychic, better psychic than psycho though! PIII 800 in all cases, quoting 3Dmark2001 (total marks, game1 high detail FPS, game2 high detail FPS, game3 high detail FPS, nature DX8 FPS):

1024x768x32:
GF2MX200: 1200, 12, 8, 12, n/a
GF4MX440: 3500, 19, 31, 28, n/a
Rad 7500: 3000, 17, 22, 25, n/a
Rad 8500: 5800, 22, 59, 33, 42

1024x768x32xAA:
GF2MX200: 530, 3, 4, 6, n/a
GF4MX440: 2500, 18, 23, 23, n/a
Rad 7500: 2200, 14, 20, 20, n/a
Rad 8500: 3800, 16, 39, 25, 24

 

[BlueFlem]

Hmmm, I have some issues with the MX cards. If your going to be watching DVD or Divx, you should consider the Radeon.

 

[AnAndAustin]

JFYI, if you upgrade your mobo and CPU (AthlonXP1800+) you would expect the following with the same cards:

1024x768x32:
GF2MX200: 1600, 16, 13, 14, n/a
GF4MX440: 6200, 47, 51, 56, n/a
Rad 7500: 6000, 43, 54, 47, n/a
Rad 8500: 9500, 51, 89, 61, 57

1024x768x32xAA:
GF2MX200: 570, 6, 5, 6, n/a
GF4MX440: 3400, 31, 32, 30, n/a
Rad 7500: 2600, 25, 22, 22, n/a
Rad 8500: 5700, 45, 50, 45, 26

As an upgrade a SktA KT266 mobo is $24 (and some can reuse your existing PC133 RAM whilst still allowing future addition of DDR) and AthlonXP1800+ with Volcano7 (excellent cooler) is $100. So that is the increase you could expect by spending $124. Ideally you would want 256MB DDR266 ($40) and possibly a new 350W+ PSU if not new case as well ($50ish). You could have it all for $220. But the benchmarks show that you would want something better than a GF2MX whatever your CPU.

 

[AnAndAustin]

BlueFlem, a PIII 800mhz is easily powerful enough to cope with DVD and MPEG playback without any hw support at all (it isn't a VIA C3 CPU you know). In any case GF4MX cards come with MPEG hw just as the Radeons do, so whatever quirk you have, it is almost certainly not linked to a GF4MX. The GF2 cards on the other hand (MX or GTS/Pro/TI/Ultra) do not (IIRC) have any hw MPEG decoders, but if you have a CPU 500mhz+ it shouldn't metter anyway!

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: rApiDShoT
My only wish is to get a Radeon 8500 or Gf3 or Gf4...

I am in Canada..some of these prices might be a bit different..

ATI Radeon 7500 64MB DDR Retail $148

ATI Radeon 8500 64MB DDR OEM $206

50 bucks more..I know there a bit diff..but it's the money issue..

ASUS V7700TI GeForce2 Ti Deluxe 32MB DDR $195

ASUS V8170 Magic GF4 64MB DDR w/ TV $139

ABIT Siluro GeForce4 MX-440 64MB w/ TV-Out $136

Weird..the Geforce 2 TI is still more than the Geforce 4 mx..

I am not a hardcore gamer...so I don't think it's needed for me to spend a lot for a video card..

So my choices are limited really..Gf4 mx or Radeon 7500...

Look here

ncix radeon 8500 64 meg price

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: rApiDShoT
I really want to consider a Xabre 400, but it's too early to buy one because the driver support isn't so great. But in most cases it did beat the Geforce 4 MX440.

Also I like the features of the card, the pixel shaders AGP 8X, it's not bad at all.

The only problem is time....I need to know the cost and if it is going to impact the Nvidia and ATI cards a lot.

I also heard it makes weird noises when it operates, that might be a hardware problem so I might have to wait for Xabre 600 or 800

At high res, the card doesn't work so great but that really isn't a problem because 1024*768 is the most really I'll go



Btw. Thanks for the links, where did u get P3 800mhz from? lol Just to tell you I do have a P3 800mhz...lol

I'd ignore the old Xabre 400 reviews because the image quality was reduced in the drivers to increase performance, when the same kind of image quality was used with the Xabre400 it's performance was inferior.

x-bit labs xabre400 review

Here is an extract from that review:-

"The default filtering quality of SiS Xabre has every reason to be called awful. The level of detail (LOD) is too low compared with that by ATI and NVIDIA chips, the image suffers from terrible "ripples" and "seeming double" or simply missing pixels. Moreover, enabling tri-linear filtering in applications doesn't seem to work: there is no tri-linear filtering at all."

 

[AnAndAustin]

The Xabre certainly has its quirks, and more reviews of final retail products would be the best guide. However all of the quirks it currently has SHOULD simply be rectifiable by driver tweaks, rem this is a VERY new card and the first truly competative product from SiS. IMHO it is still a better alternative to the Rad7500 or GF4MX440, if you don't mind taking a slight gamble, the promise is definitely there.

 

[rApiDShoT]

Isn't the Radeon 9700 coming out soon? Also know as the R300 or something? I guess the price for the 8500 will drop also

Just found out, it's in August

The Xabre seem to be quite a decent video card. Just wondering how the support is going to be like...

I still think Nvidia's driver support is excellent but if the Xabre can beat the Geforce 4 MX in most cases, that means nothing really.

Still confused on what I should get...I guess it's the best to wait....