What is faster Geforce 4 MX420 or Geforce 2 Pro?

Byte

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2000
2,877
6
81
the Gef4 MX420 has regular SDR right? So which would be faster?
 

Rand

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,071
1
81
In terms of pure gaming performance the GF2 Pro is almost always faster then the GF4 MX420, there are exceptions but those are by and large a distinct rarety.
I tend to put the GF4 MX420 as being roughly on-par with the GeForce2 GTS-V.

Most GF4 MX420's use SDR SDRAM but not all. There are a handful of DDR based MX420's but those are relegated to a cut down 64bit memory bus, rather then the 128bit memory bus utilized by the SDR iterations. In such a scenario the SDR MX420's are usually slightly faster, as DDR is less bandwidth efficient then SDR SDRAM.
 

Vidclone

Banned
Jul 31, 2002
53
0
0
Yeah if you get a Geforce4mx420 with DDR it would be about the same as a Geforce2 Pro but if u get one with SDR ram then the geforce2 Pro would be better

i just got a Geforce4mx460 thats sposed to be faster then a Geforce3 Ti200 card for $80 CHEAP eagle brand card !
works fine but for some reason it was clocked at the spead of a mx440 oh well still cheap.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:eek: Vidclone, you missed Rand's point, there is no advantage at all having DDR on an MX420 as it is only 64bit instead of the usual 128bit. 128bit SDR will be slightly faster if anything than 64bit DDR. Don't get caught out, some manus have been doing this since the GF2MX days.

;) Anyway, as mentioned the GF4MX420 has surprising perf considering it uses SDR. I've looked at it's perf pretty closely in reviews etc and it does come out at GF2GTS or Rad7500 speed, as such GF4MX420 will be slightly slower than GF2Pro. Both cards o/c very well but the GF2Pro will certainly gain the most. The GF4MX cards are enhanced in other ways though, much better image quality, dual display and TVout/VIVO. If you want the best perf go GF2Pro, if you want the GF4MX enhancements get the GF4MX420, its perf isn't a whole lot slower.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
;) Vidclone, GF4MX460 is no where near GF3TI200 perf, and that's before the TI200 o/c's to about TI500 speed too. Plus GF3 cards all have full DX8 hw functions which is important in some current games and will become very important in future games. GF4MX460 is far better than GF2TI/GTS/Pro, GF4MX440 and Rad7500 but it is in no way superior to any GF3 card which not only has much better perf and DX8 hw but also much better AA and Aniso too. Of course the GF4MX cards do have better image quality, dual monitor support and marginally better TVout/VIVO though.

:D Here's some GF4MX420 reviews (do note GF4MX440 is well-priced and a lot better than GF4MX420 and any GF2 card):

Rad7500SDR vs GF4MX420 SDR (inc GF4MX440/460 & GF2TI)

GF4MX420 review (inc GF2MX400, GF3TI200 & GF3TI500)

GF4MX420+o/c & others review NON-ENGLISH (inc Rad7500, GF2TI & GF2MX400) - MX420 Benchmarks very near end

GF4MX420 review (inc GF4MX440 & GF3)
 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,770
7
91
Well, the GF4 MX460 do approach and sometimes even outperform the GF3 Ti200 in older generation games based on the Q3A engine. Q3A, RtCW and JK2 all play as well on the MX460 as the Ti200 in most cases.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:) Yeah the MX460 card is certainly GF2 to the max, while GF3TI200 is the slowest DX8 GF3/GF4 card. MC460 is not at all bad, far better than MX440, Rad7500 and any GF2 card, but is it worth the price considering how little Rad8500 and GF3 cards cost? The GF3TI200 is clocked far below its true potential in order to promote sales fo GF3TI500 cards, this is why pretty much any GF3TI200 can o/c to VERY near GF3TI500 speeds. At stock speeds the MX460's 300/550 do help it in some games to outperform the TI200 at 175/400 but there is no doubt which card is the better performer, esp when DX8 is concerned. MX460 will certainly possess better image quality, dual display and TVout, but from a perf stand point the MX460 is a decent card but no where near GF3TI200 IMHO.
 

daywalker

Member
Feb 1, 2002
189
0
0
Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
:) Yeah the MX460 card is certainly GF2 to the max, while GF3TI200 is the slowest DX8 GF3/GF4 card. MC460 is not at all bad, far better than MX440, Rad7500 and any GF2 card, but is it worth the price considering how little Rad8500 and GF3 cards cost? The GF3TI200 is clocked far below its true potential in order to promote sales fo GF3TI500 cards, this is why pretty much any GF3TI200 can o/c to VERY near GF3TI500 speeds. At stock speeds the MX460's 300/550 do help it in some games to outperform the TI200 at 175/400 but there is no doubt which card is the better performer, esp when DX8 is concerned. MX460 will certainly possess better image quality, dual display and TVout, but from a perf stand point the MX460 is a decent card but no where near GF3TI200 IMHO.

I agree with you, the GF3 Ti200 is far superior than the GF4MX series. Im getting one my self next week... Btw do you know how far can a Geforce3 ti200 be overclocked?
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D GF3TI200 like GF4TI4200 are clocked far below their true potential to promote sales of the more expensive options, as such they o/c very well indeed. GF3TI200 should o/c to within 10% of a GF3TI500 and some can exceed TI500 speeds. In clock speeds the GF3TI200 run at 175/400 and the core should hit about 240 and the RAM depends upon the ns rating. 5ns is usual and won't go much higher but 4ns is much better and should get you to 500mhz, so you should get to 240/440 (5ns) or 240/500 (4ns) compared to TI500 at 240/500.

:eek: As with any o/c'ing results vary even with the same manu and type of card, but as always use small steps in RAM first and then core (but try both ways around) and test thoroughly at each level (3Dmark loops?) looking for visual glitches or instability, when you find your limit back off a couple of notches so you aren't stressing your components as much which should prevent ageing and make for a long term stable o/c.
 

Actaeon

Diamond Member
Dec 28, 2000
8,657
20
76
Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
:D GF3TI200 like GF4TI4200 are clocked far below their true potential to promote sales of the more expensive options, as such they o/c very well indeed. GF3TI200 should o/c to within 10% of a GF3TI500 and some can exceed TI500 speeds. In clock speeds the GF3TI200 run at 175/400 and the core should hit about 240 and the RAM depends upon the ns rating. 5ns is usual and won't go much higher but 4ns is much better and should get you to 500mhz, so you should get to 240/440 (5ns) or 240/500 (4ns) compared to TI500 at 240/500.

:eek: As with any o/c'ing results vary even with the same manu and type of card, but as always use small steps in RAM first and then core (but try both ways around) and test thoroughly at each level (3Dmark loops?) looking for visual glitches or instability, when you find your limit back off a couple of notches so you aren't stressing your components as much which should prevent ageing and make for a long term stable o/c.

AnandAustin is correct on about everything. My Ti200 is at 240/544, and capable of 244/544. Very nice overclocker.

AnandAustin, my Ti200 runs 5ns ram... why is it capable of going so high? Technically it shouldn't go that high, but it does, and much further beyond.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D You must just have some VERY nice quality stuff. On paper this is the fastest DDR RAM should run and in brackets what it often can run at:

5.0ns=400 (430)
4.5ns=444 (460)
4.0ns=500 (550)
3.6ns=555 (600)
3.3ns=606 (700)

:eek: You always get a variance in RAM chips, or any chips for that matter and that is why manu's don't run the RAM too near its maximum speed as there would be too many cards discarded during quality control. This margin of safety is usually pretty generous and is great for o/c'ers, esp on TI200 and TI4200 cards as they often run no where near there attainable speeds in the first place. With manu processes and technology improving the lower rated chips are probably getting better and better and is why with system RAM you often find the RAM at the cutting edge comes in at CL3.0 and in time this improves to CL2.5 and then to CL2.0, and the RAM designed for slower speeds often has CL2.0. If your card hits that great, you may find great quality 5ns can equal the speed of poorer quality 4ns.
 

daywalker

Member
Feb 1, 2002
189
0
0
Originally posted by: Actaeon
AnandAustin is correct on about everything. My Ti200 is at 240/544, and capable of 244/544. Very nice overclocker.

AnandAustin, my Ti200 runs 5ns ram... why is it capable of going so high? Technically it shouldn't go that high, but it does, and much further beyond.

What cooling methods did you use to overclock your card? And how cool is your system overall?

 

Byte

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2000
2,877
6
81
heh, i have 4 fans on my Geforce 4 ti4400 alone :p I have a Lian Li PC70, i can fit a LOT of fans. I also use a rheobus so it's quiet too!

Thanks for all the info guys about the geforces. I think the MX420 will be good for all my purposes. They are for mostly machines i'm building that are for word processing/surfing, ect. 3D doesn't need to be good at all, but with Geforce 2 Pro and MX420 being both around $50, i wanted to know which i should choose since they are about the same price. Having a Geforce 4 probably still sounds a lot better than a 2 :p. Ti200 are really great for budget gamers, i have a few already, for around $80-90 they are simply awesome for the performance you get from them, esp when compared to Gef4MX cards.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D Cool! Yeah the GF4MX420 isn't far behind the GF2pro for 3D and both o/c well too. But for image quality and other enhancements the GF4MX card will be the better choice IMHO, plus if you ever want to sell the card on in the future it will be a lot easier to shift a GF4MX than a GF2.

;) However the Rad9000/9000pro are much better than the GF4MX cards and should be well priced too. They sport all of the advantages of getting a GF4MX over a GF2pro BUT also possess FULL DX8 HW too. The Rad9000pro is very near GF3TI200 perf although it is true that the Rad8500LE is an even better card, but see how the prices way up. Obviously you are unlikely to get a Rad9000 for $50 but it would be worth paying a little more, esp for future games and 3D apps. GF4MX420 is a much better card than it's given credit for, esp considering the price and will suit your purposes well, but do check out the Rad9000/9000pro cards too before you buy.
 

Byte

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2000
2,877
6
81
The only reason i buy Radeons are for the All In Wonder series and they have disappointed me time and time again. I wanna switch, but with funky software i don't think that will happen anytime soon. Nvidia drivers are as solid as hell. Hopefully they have some better catalyst drivers for the 9700 and maybe better Wonder implementation. ATI 2D is way overrated and seems very slow on WinXP.
 

jiffylube1024

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
7,430
0
71
Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
:D GF3TI200 like GF4TI4200 are clocked far below their true potential to promote sales of the more expensive options, as such they o/c very well indeed. GF3TI200 should o/c to within 10% of a GF3TI500 and some can exceed TI500 speeds. In clock speeds the GF3TI200 run at 175/400 and the core should hit about 240 and the RAM depends upon the ns rating. 5ns is usual and won't go much higher but 4ns is much better and should get you to 500mhz, so you should get to 240/440 (5ns) or 240/500 (4ns) compared to TI500 at 240/500.

This is, of course a rough estimate. I have 2 GF3 Ti200's, of them, the MSI card o/c's to 225/520 stably, and the other one (not sure the brand) o/c's to about 230/460. The memory cannot go any higher at all, and gets massive glitches at even 480 MHz! I'm not sure what ns they're rated at (I assume 5 ns), but I can't check because they're covered by the RAMsinks.
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:eek: Unfortunately jiffylube1024 there will always be a natural variance in o/c'ing components, esp if a manu wants to cheap out and save $5 by sticking things like 5ns RAM on their cards. Plus the biggest reason for manus to use RAM HS is to make the cards look pretty and to HIDE the RAM chips themselves and VERY little else.

:D Anyway, when you consider the default TI200 speeds of 175/400 you find that 230/460 is still an excellent speed boost and not a world away from TI500 speed at 240/500 as 4% core and 9% RAM means that you should find you're within 10% of TI500 speed. Obviously 225/520 is better and should give true TI500 speed but don't underestimate the other card's perf boost from a simple o/c.