Ti4200 vsTi4400

[Bloodstein]

I'd like to know the differences between Ti4200 and Ti4400 graphics cards. There's a bit of a price difference between them but not sure if I really need the Ti4400 (I've already dismissed the 4600...totally out of my price range). I'm just an average gamer (although i would like to be able to maximise the features of UT 2003).

Also, what does the Ti4200 compare like to the Mx series? I posted on the Mx before and everyone said it's a waste of time. However, the price of a Gainward Ti4200 (the basic one) is not too far from the Gainward Mx460....so I'm wondering if those two offer similar performances. If they are, then I'd probably go for the Ti4400...

Thanks

 

[Maggotry]

I think the MX line of GF4's do not have DX8 support. Basically, they have even fewer features than the GF3's. As far as I'm concerned, they're out of the question for gaming. If you like to overclock, then get the 4200 and oc it to or near 4400 levels. If you don't want to oc, then get the 4400 as it will have better ut2 performance, but not a whole lot.

 

[kgraeme]

Originally posted by: Bloodstein
Also, what does the Ti4200 compare like to the Mx series? I posted on the Mx before and everyone said it's a waste of time. However, the price of a Gainward Ti4200 (the basic one) is not too far from the Gainward Mx460....so I'm wondering if those two offer similar performances. If they are, then I'd probably go for the Ti4400...

Thanks

The MX series is basically a rebadged GeForce2. It doesn't utilize the same core as a "true" GeForce 4.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Bloodstein
I'd like to know the differences between Ti4200 and Ti4400 graphics cards. There's a bit of a price difference between them but not sure if I really need the Ti4400 (I've already dismissed the 4600...totally out of my price range). I'm just an average gamer (although i would like to be able to maximise the features of UT 2003).

Also, what does the Ti4200 compare like to the Mx series? I posted on the Mx before and everyone said it's a waste of time. However, the price of a Gainward Ti4200 (the basic one) is not too far from the Gainward Mx460....so I'm wondering if those two offer similar performances. If they are, then I'd probably go for the Ti4400...

Thanks

The Ti4400 and 4200 have the exact same features. The only difference is a minor clock speed one, resulting in about a 5-15% speed difference. However, with overclocking the 4200 can go to 4400 speeds and beyond often. The difference between the two, when both overclock is negligible; they're very very close to eachother in performance.

Both of them offer EXCELLENT performance with games right now, very close to one another, and both are WAY faster and better equipped for the future than any of the MX chips, including the 460MX.

Get a Ti4200, you won't regret it, and the price difference between it and a 4400 is not worth it at all!

Hope this helps!

 

[Bloodstein]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024


The Ti4400 and 4200 have the exact same features. The only difference is a minor clock speed one, resulting in about a 5-15% speed difference. However, with overclocking the 4200 can go to 4400 speeds and beyond often. The difference between the two, when both overclock is negligible; they're very very close to eachother in performance.

Both of them offer EXCELLENT performance with games right now, very close to one another, and both are WAY faster and better equipped for the future than any of the MX chips, including the 460MX.

Get a Ti4200, you won't regret it, and the price difference between it and a 4400 is not worth it at all!

Hope this helps!

Hmn....I have a friend that reckons I'm wasting my money on any of the Titanium series. His arguments are along the lines of the Titanium series offer such high resolutions that only the high end monitors would be able to support it. Hence, if u own a medium-level monitor (such as the Phillips 107S), then Titanium is a waste of time. In fact, he reckons that he is underusing his Mx440.

Of course, judging from the fact that he's no PC guru and most ppl on this forum are encouraging the Titanium series, I'm sure the Titanium series is the way to go. But does he have a point in saying Ti's are only for high-end monitors that support high resolutions? Hmn, I just realised he's ignoring the fps factor....

 

[Leffe]

No, the difference between mx and ti cards is not about resolution. So go for the ti card since its GPU has much more whistles and bells then the mx.

Leif...

 

[WyteWatt]

It is always good to have a nice 17 or 19 inch + maybe monitor when you get a high end video card too so you can take advantage of your new video card!! So you can play at high resolutions if you want with a good enough refresh rate. A GF4 ti series video card and a 14 or 15 inch monitor would not be good at all. I had a 14 inch monitor before i went from my old voodoo 3 2000 pci video card to finally a new video card which was a Leadtek GF4 ti 4400 my vivo edition. Then i overclocked it to exactly GF4 ti 4600 speeds for now. Next time i think i will just get a video card without the vivo and just buy a seprate card sense i will have to buy a new video card every time with vivo which will make it more expersive than just buying a seprate vivo card instead. Inless I don't want vivo next time.

 

[robelanator]

agreed on all that was posted above.

I recently bought a Gainward "Golden Sample" GeForce4 Ti 4200 and it overclocks like mad. It runs perfectly stable right out of the box at the max settings of Nvidia's Coolbits. Got it for about $150, too.

Just a warning, though, that the GeForce4's tend to be very CPU reliant. For instance, when running on a 1Ghz processor I could overclock the card all I wanted and only see about a 5% increase in 3dMark2001. When I upgraded to an Athlon XP 1600, though, I noticed the performance increase was way more pronounced.