whats your Ti4200 overclocked to?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:( It seems the majority of you guys don't read the other posts concerning 4200 cards. Well once again here's a bunch of links and I'll quote what I've put elsewhere.

Tech report

Toms HW

AnAndTech

Firing Squad

AnAndTech showing 128 vs 64

:-? The FiringSquad example of Commanche4 showing the 4200-64 (o/c 285/600) slower than 4200-128 (def 250/444) could suggest the performance hit when a game requires more than 64MB as will become more and more common. Also check out the last AndAndTech link which shows that 64MB cards will begin to lag behind 128MB cards and only have a 2% average lead over 128 when both are at default clocks anyway.

For 4200 cards (whether 64 or 128):
5.0ns gets to 480mhz
4.0ns gets to 550mhz
3.6ns gets to 600mhz
3.3ns gets to 600mhz

:D So anyway, for o/c it comes down to the type of RAM implemented regardless of whether the 4200 has 64MB or 128MB, the only difference is 20 notes in price and higher default clocks, but who's going to buy a 4200 and not o/c it? Running a 4200-128 at 250/500 shouldn't be considered o/c anyway, if nVidia had set 4200-128 at the same default clocks nobody would be interested in the 4200-64! Just like when they intentional underclocked the GF3TI200 just so it wouldn't hurt GF3TI500 sales. Oh and you can find your ns rating by looking at the last 2 numbers on the 2nd line of your RAM chips, 456D65E-RC40 denotes 4.0ns RAM.

:D So if your in the market for a 4200 it's certainly worth while going for 4200-128 with the usual 4.0ns RAM which averagely reaches 300/550. If you can find a 4200 using 3.6ns RAM you should expect 300/600, you won't get 600+ even though 3.6ns 4400 cards give those as it comes down to TSOP, 2 fewer layers and power regulation which is why 4200 cards are so much cheaper in the first place. Don't pay over the odds for a suped up 4200 as you'll find the 4400 will be at a comparible price and a much better buy. That Suma is more of a slower 4400 than a suped up 4200, anybody seen it in the flesh yet?
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D Oh and don't forget that prices vary wildly from country to country so there isn't one 'best buy' for everyone. Remember that both the 4200-128@250/444 and 4200-64@250/500 still beat both the GF3TI500 and full blown ATI Radeon8500 which people were paying $300 for 6 months ago. The majority of which came with 'only' 64MB of RAM.

;) Don't get me wrong, both the 64MB and 128MB cards have their advantages, but just don't buy a 4200-64 expecting it will give better o/c, make your o/c judgements based upon the RAM rating. Anybody who currently has a 64MB GF3 or Radeon8500/8500LE should be in no hurry to upgrade, you'd be better off waiting to see what the next gen cards are like. Just don't expect too much, AGP8x is more about marketing than perf gain, and as for DX9, it will take about a year for games to begin taking advantage of it in any reasonable quantity, by then they'll be better faster cards out anyway. If you buy a next gen card do so on the firm basis of what it can do now (50% faster than a GF4TI4600?) rather than expecting to gain a lot from DX9 or AGP8x. Oh and they'll probably cost a heck of a lot too. At this moment in time the 4200-128 offers the best price/perf and longevity (imagine trying to sell on a 64MB card in 12 months time), no matter what ATI (or anybody else) can conjure up I doubt the 4200 will alter in price much (unlike 4400/4600), I don't expect nVidia or ATI (let alone anyone else) can afford to make cards of that calibre and sell them for much under 140 notes.

:D That's my take on it anyway. And I might as well add that GF4 cards are easily as good (at long last) as ATI or Matrox cards, just to dispell another myth!
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D Forgot to mention that all o/c are from a wide variety of trusted sources with STANDARD COOLING (no mods), mostly reviews and consumers experiences. But always remember NOTHING is guaranteed with o/c (even with 'identical' cards), any advantage you gain is a free one and they'll always be someone who got their card higher.

;) Also this is only my humble opinion, in a months time 3dfx could make a comeback with a Voodoo2002 card which is twice as fast and half the price of the 4200, but I think it is relatively safe to make certain educated predictions and the 4200-128 is the safest buy since Radeon8500LE (which still cuts the mustard incidently).
 

mee987

Senior member
Jan 23, 2002
773
0
0
Also this is only my humble opinion, in a months time 3dfx could make a comeback with a Voodoo2002 card which is twice as fast and half the price of the 4200
Why would they make another card under the 3dfx name? I thought they let the name die?
 

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,666
123
106
www.neftastic.com
#1 - I found that 3dmark scores of 11000+ have generally one thing in common - a Pentium 4 overclocked into the 2500MHz+ range. I've seen a few heavily OC'd Athlons make it into the 10000-11000 range as well. Most of the 3dmark score seems to be CPU dependant, as my meager non-OC'd Athlon 1.4GHz and GF4Ti4200 manage a humble 8000 3dmarks.

#2 - 3dfx will never, ever, EVER make a comeback, as NVIDIA bought all rights to the intellectual property, and even moreso, all legal and trademark rights to the 3dfx brand name. That's not to say that the NV30 isn't a 3dfx design though...

SunnyD
 

AnAndAustin

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2002
2,112
0
0
:D I think you guys kind of missed my point. I wasn't saying that 3dfx were going to make a comeback, I was simply saying that you never know what's around the corner, but from what is likely and can be predicted it is a damn fine time to be buying a GF4TI4200.

;) As for needing a P4 2.5ghz to get over 10000 marks, a quick flick through the results browser show a very different story. There are lots of other CPU combinations, but GF4TI4600 certainly seems far more apparent than anything else. P4 1.8 &4600, AthlonXP1900+ &4600, XP2000+&R8500, even AthlonXP1600+ &4600 and a standard Athlon1.3 &4600! (http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=3386026). Even a Duron1.3 &4400 can break the barrier (http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=3829234).

But for the sake of interest shall we take a look at a few possible combinations (top score given):

P4 1.6ghz & Radeon7500 5445
P4 1.6ghz & GF3TI500 8277
P4 1.6ghz & GF4TI4200 8973
P4 1.6ghz & GF4TI4600 9734

AthlonXP2000+ & R7500 6728
AthlonXP2000+ & TI500 10116
AthlonXP2000+ & 4200 11893
AthlonXP2000+ & 4600 13973

P4 2.5ghz & R7500 6681
P4 2.5ghz & TI500 10426
P4 2.5ghz & 4200 13018
P4 2.5ghz & 4600 13722

:) Obviously you don't get cards or CPUs like these to play in 1024x768x32 without AA or any other enhancements, but it is still a good indication of what performs better, I think it's plain to see that there's no point in giving a top CPU a lower-end gfx card, and even the benefits of a faster card can be realised on a P4 1.6ghz or XP1600+. The better gfx cards will come in to play once a higher resolution and AA are introduced. You certainly don't need a top end CPU to break 10000 marks at the standard 1024x768x32 though.
 

TheMuse

Junior Member
Jul 30, 2002
7
0
0
Is that with 128mb or 64mb ddr memory? I have one of each and supposedly the pny 64mg ti 4200 advertises that it has a higher bus speed, right? But don't the latest games (ie quake 3) require up to 80mg of memory?

Newbie.

george
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY