The GeForce4 Ti (NV25) was launched in April 2002 and was a revision of the GeForce 3 (NV20). It was very similar to its predecessor; the main differences were higher core and memory clock rates, a revised memory controller, an additional vertex shader, hardware anti-aliasing and DVD playback.[1] Proper dual-monitor support was also brought over from the GeForce 2 MX.[2] The GeForce4 Ti outperformed the older GeForce 3 by a significant margin.[1] The competing ATI Radeon 8500 was generally faster than the GeForce 3 line, but was overshadowed by the GeForce 4 Ti in every area other than price and more advanced pixel shader (1.4) support.[1]
The initial two models were the Ti4400 and the top-of-the-range Ti4600. At the time of their introduction, NVIDIA's main products were the entry-level GeForce 2 MX, the midrange GeForce4 MX models (released the same time as the Ti4400 and Ti4600), and the older but still high-performance GeForce 3 (demoted to the upper mid-range or performance niche).[1] However, ATI's Radeon 8500LE was somewhat cheaper than the Ti4400, and outperformed its price competitors, the GeForce 3 Ti200 and GeForce4 MX 460. The GeForce 3 Ti500 filled the performance gap between the Ti200 and the Ti4400 but it could not be produced cheap enough to compete with the Radeon 8500.
In consequence, NVIDIA rolled out a slightly cheaper model: the Ti4200. Although the 4200 was initially supposed to be part of the launch of the GeForce4 line, NVIDIA had delayed its release to sell off the soon-to-be discontinued GeForce 3 chips. In an attempt to prevent the Ti4200 damaging the Ti4400's sales, NVIDIA set the Ti4200's memory speed at 222 MHz on the models with a 128 MiB frame buffer - a full 53 MHz slower than the Ti4400 (all of which had 128 MiB frame buffers). Models with a 64 MiB frame buffer were set to 250 MHz memory speed. This tactic didn't work however, for two reasons. Firstly, the Ti4400 was perceived as being not good enough for those who wanted top performance (who preferred the Ti4600), nor those who wanted good value for money (who typically chose the Ti4200), causing the Ti4400 to fade into obscurity. Furthermore, some graphics card makers simply ignored NVIDIA's guidelines for the Ti4200, and set the memory speed at 250 MHz on the 128 MiB models anyway. NVIDIA also missed a chance to dominate the upper-range/performance segment by delaying the release of the Ti4200 and by not rolling out 128 MiB models quickly enough; otherwise the Ti4200 was cheaper and faster than the previous top-line GeForce 3 and Radeon 8500. Besides the late introduction of the Ti4200, the limited release 128 MB models of the GeForce 3 Ti200 proved unimpressive, letting the Radeon 8500LE and even the full 8500 dominated the upper-range performance for a while.[3]
Then in late 2002, the NV25 core was replaced by the NV28 core, which differed only by addition of AGP-8X support. The Ti4200 with AGP-8X support was based on this chip, and sold as the Ti4200-8X. A Ti4800SE replaced the Ti4400 and a Ti4800 replaced the Ti4600 respectively when the 8X AGP NV28 core was introduced on these.[4][5] If the naming convention that had been applied to the AGP-8X capable Ti4200-8X was to have been applied consistently, these two cards should have been named Ti4400-8X and Ti4600-8X.
The GeForce 4 Ti4200 remained the best balance between price and performance until the launch of the ATI Radeon 9500 Pro at the end of 2002.[6] The Ti4200 still managed to hold its own against several next generation DirectX 9 chips released in late 2003; beating out the lackluster GeForce FX 5200 and the midrange FX 5600 and performing at parity with the midrange Radeon 9600.[7][8] The ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, however, generally outclassed the Ti4600 in performance and had a notably superior feature-set
Facebook
Twitter