Radeon 9000 Pro vs. GeForce 4 TI4200

[Slick5150]

I'm currently running an ATI Radeon LE (the oddball version of the original Radeon 32mb DDR), and I'm looking to upgrade it, but don't want to spend to much money. I'm finding prices for the Radeon 9000 Pro (64mb) for about $85 shipped. Prices on an eVga Geforce 4 TI4200 are about $130 shipped (the cheapest Geforce 4 TI4200 card I could find).

Any recommendations as to which one to go with? I know the Geforce 4 will give better performance, but is it worth the extra money? $45 isn't a ton of money, but, that's one less game I can buy.

Thanks

 

[Athlon4all]

Well, take a look at Anandtech's Radeon 9000 Pro review.It really all depends. Let me put it to you think way. The R9000 Pro is not playable at 1024x768 in the most demanding levels of UT 2003 (see the review for exact numbers), where as the Ti 4200 is. Same can be said about games like Serious Sam:2 except at 1280x1024 is where the 9000 cannot be played whereas the Ti 4200 could. So, I would look over that review, and consider UT 2003 to be a gauge for games like Doom III and other intensive next gen games, while Serious Sam 2 to be somewhat less demanding version of games like Doom III and UT 2003. I hope this helps. LMK if u could use some more help. I'd be happy to give more

 

[AnAndAustin]

PinwiZ, what CPU are you running and are there any plans to upgrade it? This makes a diff when deciding what gfx card to go with.

To give you some info in the meantime, Rad9000pro is SLOWER and INFERIOR to Rad8500LE. It's only redeeming feature is its abnility to enhance MPEG playback with DX8 hw which should be great for low quality video, but how important is MPEG playback to you?

 

[AnAndAustin]

Your choice should be between Rad8500LE, GF3TI200 and GF4TI4200. Rad8500LE is slightly faster than an o/c'ed GF3TI200 and sports better image quality, dual display, TVout and hw DVD playback, BUT GF3TI200 has better quality Aniso and much better AA. GF4TI4200 is not only faster (lots when o/c'ed) but has excellent image quality, dual display, enhanced TVout (over GF3), great Aniso quality and excellent AA (2xA and QxAA). The 4200 is undoubtedly the best card, but then GF3TI200 and Rad8500LE are about $90 while 4200 is $130-130 (64MB-128MB). While on the subject, you really want 128MB in any new card, although 4200-64MB is still preferable to a 128MB GF3TI200 or Rad8500LE. Some current games and certainly most new games will hit 64MB VERY hard, eg. current game Commanche4 shows a 4200-64MB at 300/600 is the same speed as a 4200-128MB at 250/444!

 

[AnAndAustin]

Check this link:

AnAndTech 4200 roundup

As a general rule even the cheapest 4200-64MB reach 300/600 and the cheapest 4200-128MB reach 300/550. To put this in perspective 4400=275/550 and 4600=300/650, now consider whether 4200 is worth the price .

 

[AdvancedRobotics]

the 9000Pro was meant to compete with the GF4 MX rather than the better Ti cards. As Austin said, the 8500LE is far better than the 9000. The 8500LE is cheaper than the 4200, but doesn't perform as well. If money is a concern, however, 8500LE is the choice. If money isn't, by all means get the better card. I would reccomend getting the 128Mb variant of either card. The price difference isn't too much that it'll kill your wallet...


A little more information would be good to give you a better suggestion (how long you are going to keep this card, your system specs, games going to be played, budget)

 

[Slick5150]

Thanks for the replys so far. Here's my requested system specs:

AMD Athlon XP 1700
ECS K7S5A
384mb PC 2100 DDR RAM
Radeon LE (the card I want to replace)
SB Audigy

I play a lot of FPS games, which obviously are pretty graphic intensive. Like I said though, I'd like to spend as little money as possible. I don't plan on upgrading the video card again for awhile hopefully (I won't be springing for the 9700 series, or the NV30 series, but maybe something beyond that). I understand that certainly the TI4200 would be a better choice were money not in the equation, but being that it is, is it $50 better?

Thanks again

 

[AnAndAustin]

See how CPU speed effects these gfx cards:

AnAndTech CPU Scaling with many games and gfx cards

Note that GF3 and Rad8500 cards gain very little from CPU speeds above Athlon 1.4ghz, your AthlonXP1700+ will be maxing out these cards while a GF4TI4200 will benefit from each and every mhz the CPU can provide. The 4200 will also easily out-last Rad8500 and GF3 which have been hurt when it comes to selling them on by the inferior GF4MX and Rad9000 cards. If you don't have a bucket of cash then 4200 is the best card in terms of all round features and perf and will devalue better than any current card AND still be able to kick it even in the new and demanding games like UT2003 and DoomIII. Whatever you choose you'll be blown away by the perf diff over your current RadeonLE, but it makes sense to buy a 4200. If your budget can't stretch I'd rec the 128MB Rad8500LE.

 

[bluemax]

The TI4200 isn't *that* much better than the Radeon 8500. Considering that the 8500 can be picked up for as little as $75US, it's the deal of the year!
The Ti4200 is a little bit faster, and gets a bit faster still if you factor in AntiAliasing and Ansiotropic Filtering. These visual goodies perform a little bit better on the Ti4200.

Is that worth more than $50 difference? Only you can decide.

8500LE - ~$80
TI4200 - ~$130

They're both excellent cards. I'm short on cash so I'll likely go with the 8500LE myself. That and I like ATI's DVD playback much better.

 

[AnAndAustin]

At default clocks 4200 isn't a whole lot faster than Rad8500, do bear in mind outside US and Canada Rad8500 cards are priced at or above the GF4TI cards making them totally redundant.

Anyway, as soon as you factor in o/c'ing (you'd be mad not to) the 4200 is way better than Rad8500, esp for AA and the faster CPUs. Rad8500 generally flattens out after Athlon1.4ghz but 4200 keeps giving extra perf all the way up to the top CPUs. Rad8500 is great in the US considering the LE version is priced under $100, but 4200 do start from $130.

People always rattle on about Rad8500's DVD playback and image quality, but these are mute point now that GF4TI easily equals Rad8500 in image quality and as for DVD playback, if you aren't using a 500mhz CPU then hw support is pretty useless anyway. If you choose Rad8500 then do so for the right reasons, in the right countries it is still great value for money and superior in nearly every way to GF3 cards.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Lets take a look at the small perf diff between the GF4TI4200 and Rad8500 even when 4200 isn't o/c'ed.

At 4200 default 250/444:
Max Payne: 1024x768=35% faster than Rad8500, 1280x1024=31% faster, 1600x1200=24% faster
Giants: 1024=3%, 1280=2%, 1600=9%
Aquanox: 1024=40%, 1280=25%, 1600=21%
Q3A: 1024=4%, 1280=9%, 1600=9%
3Dmark2001: 1024=4%, 1280=5%, 1600=7%
Commanche4: 1024=126%, 1280=122%, 1600=105% (yes, 105% faster is 205% the speed or more than double the perf!)
Q3A 1024: 2xAA=91% 4xAA=139%

Cheapest 4200-128MB are set at 250/444 but easily achieve o/c of 275/550 reaching GF4TI4400 speeds

 

[Slick5150]

I appreciate all of the advice everyone. Based on your comments, I went ahead and purchased an eVga Geforce 4 TI4200 card ($128 shipped at gameve.com). It did sound like it would be the better investment based on my current setup.

Thanks again for the help.

 

[AnAndAustin]

NICE!

Let us know how you find it, esp what diffs there are compared to your old gfx card.

 

[Slick5150]

Well, for those curious parties, I received my new eVGA 64mb Geforce 4 TI4200 card today, and it is now installed. I did a little before and after comparison using 3dmark 2001se. The summary would be an overall score of 4661 with my RadeonLE score, and 10172 with the new Geforce 4 card, so there's obviously some significant improvement overall. I don't think I have everything tweaked properly yet, and I haven't overclocked the card at all, so, I think there's still room for improvement.

Here' s the detailed scores:
Before: http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=4262534
After: http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=4271468

Anybody know what I can expect the fastest stable overclock speeds on this new card to be?

Thanks again for the advice. So far, so good!

 

[gwlam12]

shoudl be more like the radeon8500 vs TI4200. I'd wait a few weeks to see what happens to prices when radeon 9700 comes out. as a matter of fact, i'm doing that right now. i currently have the ati radeon 32MB DDR OEM.

 

[AnAndAustin]

PinwiZ, how far your 4200 can go is 98% dependent upon the RAM used, read it from the RAM chips, usually 2nd line down last 2 digits. 4.0ns will definitely hit 500mhz buit should get to 550, 3.6ns will get 555 but should hit 600mhz. Most common RAM types are 4.0ns on 4200-128 and 3.6ns on 4200-64. However, you have to o/c your 4200 the same as any other component, small steps and test thoroughly at each level, when you reach the limit (usually visual artifacts) back off a couple of notches and you're set. Your 4200-64 should be set to 250/500 and 280/550 is very safe while 300/600 should be attainable. Best of luck and happy gaming