Xabre or GeForce4 MX440? (GOT SOMETHING ELSE!!!)

[kevmev12]

Hmm... certainly not good news indeed. Gaming is not as important but it is a big part of what I want to do with the computer. Just got a reply from a US company about international orders, they do ship to Australia but the cost is $US58 using Global Express Mail...! That just completely turned me off buying a card from overseas!

Have to do more searching for prices, expecially in regards to the Radeon 8500LE... will let you all know what happens. Here is what I'm thinking though:

Xabre - not even considering it anymore
MX440 - very last option, if I had no other choice
GF3Ti200 - not DX8 compatible, DVD playback IS important to me but will consider it for the right price
Radeon 7500 - need to find a good price for it, card must be made from ATi also
Radeon 8500LE - really want to get this, but price is putting me off; considering raising my budget for it...
GF4Ti4200 - cost way too much, although it would be nice to have it

 

[holdencommodore]

These are from Melbourne stores.... I.Store have the 64MB Radeon 8500LE (with TV out and DVI) for $260. www.istore.com.au. They havn't updated their web prices though (listed at $270). I think they might have a store in Sydney also.

Computers & Parts Land have the same card for $260, but their web prices are out of date too.

The prices must be falling with the newer ATi cards comming out.... the more you wait, the more the price will fall.

Happy price hunting

Cheers

 

[kazeakuma]

Originally posted by: kevmev12
Hmm... certainly not good news indeed. Gaming is not as important but it is a big part of what I want to do with the computer. Just got a reply from a US company about international orders, they do ship to Australia but the cost is $US58 using Global Express Mail...! That just completely turned me off buying a card from overseas!

Have to do more searching for prices, expecially in regards to the Radeon 8500LE... will let you all know what happens. Here is what I'm thinking though:

Xabre - not even considering it anymore
MX440 - very last option, if I had no other choice
GF3Ti200 - not DX8 compatible, DVD playback IS important to me but will consider it for the right price
Radeon 7500 - need to find a good price for it, card must be made from ATi also
Radeon 8500LE - really want to get this, but price is putting me off; considering raising my budget for it...
GF4Ti4200 - cost way too much, although it would be nice to have it

The GF3Ti200 IS DX8 compatible. Just thought I'd clear that up.
Also, holdencommodore (sorry but the monaro is better) that card listed is a Sapphire card not an ati

 

[AnAndAustin]

DVD playback is a pretty small issue for any PC possessing a CPU faster than 600mhz, the only gfx cards worth considering for enhanced DVD playback are the Rad9000/9000pro and the Rad9700 which enhance the playback with DX8 hw functions.

Xabre400, LOADS of promise but too risky at the moment. For pure gaming it is certainly better than GF4MX440 and Rad7500, but it still has compatibility probs and driver issues, with the Rad9000 it will make no sense either.

GF4MX440, fine card, only as fast as a GF2TI (50%ish faster than a GF2MX400) and has no DX8 hw, but it does offer good image quality, good AA, good dual display and good DVD playback.

GF3TI200 is MUCH faster than a GF4MX440 plus the GF3 cards ALL have full DX8 hw. The GF3 cards don't have great image quality, but unless you are IQ aware and plan on lots of working at high res (1024x768x32+) with 72Hz+ refresh rates then IQ isn't that important. GF3 cards lack dual display functionality and don't decode DVD in hw (see the CPU comment above). GF3 do have great AA and Aniso though.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Rad7500 is about as good as a GF4MX440 but with better TVout although the AA on 7500 plain sucks, it is pretty even. GF4MX440 would be the better buy. The Rad7500 like GF4MX440 is NOT full DX8 hw compliant.

Rad8500LE is an excellent full DX8 hw card, a bit faster than a GF3TI200 can achieve at o/c, DVD hw playback, great IQ, dual monitor support and great TVout. It sucks at AA though, and Aniso is fast but low quality.

GF4TI4200 is much faster than Rad8500LE and equals the Rad8500LE in all depts except TVout. The GF4TI cards also have excellent AA and Aniso too. They tend to o/c to GF4TI4400 or GF4TI4600 speeds too. Again GF4TI cards don't usually possess DVD hw playback but see CPU note again.

Regarding non-ATI Radeon cards, like oem ATI versions they usually use lower clocks and cheaper RAM which inhibits o/c'ing. This usually hits their perf by around 10%, not unbearable and probably worth it if they are 15%+ cheaper. The non-ATI cards may also lack the ATI build and image quality, and also often skimp on RAMDACs which destroys dual display functionality.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Aussie price-wise, you should find a GF4TI4200 at a comparable price to an ATI Rad8500LE at around $300, the GF4TI card is by far the better card. Lower down you should find $240ish are the prices for non-ATI Rad8500LE and GF3TI200 cards, they are very close and both good buys. If you really have to stick to a $200 limit then you are best with a GF4MX440. For a CPU faster than 1.3ghz you really do want at least a Rad9000pro or GF3TI200. Ideally get a 128MB card whatever you choose, but a 64MB 4200 is certainly better than a 128MB Rad8500LE.

Rem that an AthlonXP2000+ with GF4MX440 is SLOWER than a Duron1.2ghz with GF3TI200! Also note that an AthlonXP2000+ with GF3TI200 is still SLOWER than an AthlonXP1600+ with GF4TI4200. This illustrates why the gfx card is so important for gaming.

 

[holdencommodore]

"holdencommodore (sorry but the monaro is better)" LOL at least it is better than Ford Falcon hehe.

Even if the product it not "built by ATi", I still think that the Saphhire 8500LE (you may also find similar priced cards from PowerColour / Auriga or GigaByte) is a pretty good card for the price.

The price of the Ti200 is pretty good too - I havn't seen a Ti 200 advertised for quite a while, the price certainly makes it worth considering.

I suppose it depends on how far the budget stretches.

Cheers

 

[gtd2000]

kevmev12
You have been gaming in the past with onboard graphics.

As mentioned before even if you upgraded to a GF2 MX card it will seem like light speed by comparison.

I built a new PC for one of my mates back home at xmas in 2001 - he had been playing Half Life etc on a Packard Bell with a Voodoo II add on card.
We used a no name MX card.
He plays a whole variety of games with the new machine (Duron 1G, MX, ECS K7S5A, 256MB RAM etc) it is by no means a high spec machine - he was over the moon with the performance of the system.

AnAndAustin is with good intention demonstrating the differences between the various cards using "benchmarks". This is all very well for a "comparison". The reality is that even if a GF4 MX is scoring 5000 3DMarks and a GF4 Ti is getting 8400 with a Duron 1.2G 5000 is still very good/fast indeed for the games that are currently on the market today. If you get anywhere near 100fps in games then you have nothing to worry about - playing RTCW or Need for Speed at 100 fps or 200fps is not going to be an issue. Benchmarks are not real life - they are simply a comparison.

Give you a real life example to relate to (not necessarily factual):

You decide to buy a Nissan Skyline that does 170mph (or whatever they do)
You could buy a Maclaren F1 that does 250mph (or whatever they do)
Is the Skyline a "slow" car?
Sure - it is slower than the Maclaren - no arguement. I'm sure nobody would consider a Skyline a "slow" car though - unless u regularly drive a Maclaren?

 

[kevmev12]

Thanks for the card comparisons AnAndAustin, it has helped me a lot. In fact everyone here has been nothing but friendly and helpful and I can't thank all of you enough for helping out a vidoe card novice/newbie like me!

I have found a brand new ATi Radeon 8500 64Mb retail box version on ebay, the guy is selling it (with the "Buy It Now" option if you all know the ebay stuff) for $AUD199 - reputable seller with a high rating, heaps of individual auctions of the same card, seems quite legitimate. Also found a local site Text selling the AOpen GF3Ti200 128Mb for $248.29. They also sell the S-Media ATi Radeon 9000 Pro 64Mb for $279, which I found interesting because this is the first local site in which I saw the 9000 being sold. I find the site from Sold.com.au, and one of the sellers is from that site. Just want to add that you can find some good dealers selling at ebay or Sold.com, don't have to buy from ebay or Sold, but just go to the dealer's site.

Because I'm not a big gamer, I've thought about it for a long time taking all of your replies to heart, and I just can't find any reasons to justify me stretching my budget over the $200-230 mark (although I would probably consider the AOpen Ti200card I mentioned above). To me, even a MX440 would probably blow my mind - just like gtd 2000 said. I just want to get more bang for my $200. I've got all the major components for my new computer, except a video card and monitor. Do you know how frustrating it is to look at all these new and unopened parts in my room right now, wanting to put them all together but trying to resist the urge because I want every part to be complete before I commence? A monitor is pretty easy enough, a 17" flat screen - the price of a Samsung ($AUD300) is appealing although I'm also looking at LG. But the video card... so much effort for it! I think I will monitor the movements of that Radeon 8500 64Mb card on ebay a bit more closely, and I'm pretty sure I will buy it for the $199 price. If not, I'll either wait a few more days for the guy to sell the same thing again for the same price, or get the AOpen GF3Ti200 card. AnAndAustins card comparisons has helped a lot, I have my mind set on 3 cards now - GF3Ti200 for $248.29, Radeon 8500 64Mb brand new on ebay for $199, or the last option, the MX440. Of course I'll let you all know what happens.

 

[gtd2000]

One bit of advice on the monitor - go for a 19"

A 17" just seems too much like a 15" for me

If buying a Samsung "Flatscreen" check for the geometry of the screen - use something with horizontal lines - e.g. XL - I had a couple sent back due to "bending" of the image.

I ended up getting a 19" 900ift in place of my originally purchased 17" from Samsung (Hong Kong)! Well impressed

They had great customer service indeed

 

[AnAndAustin]

Well just because the guy's been used to onboard gfx and that a GF2MX will seem like lightning doesn't mean it is a good buy or not a waste of money. The benchmarks are synthetic but they do mimic the idfference you will experience in the majority of games with different setups too. A better analogy for me would be putting the Skyline's engine in the Maclaren F1 to save 5% of the overall cost of the car. Buying an AthlonXP2000+ and then sticking in a GF2MX, or even GF2TI/GF4MX440 is completely wasting the extra CPU power and you'd be outperformed by a Duron1.2ghz with a GF3TI200 or Rad8500LE. Rem this handy link which uses a Axp2000+ with a whole array of gfx cards (rem none of these are o/c'ed): TomsHW VGA Chart

I second going for a 19", a standard 19" would be better for most people than a flat 17", in any case 19" monitors only tend to cost a little more than a 17" but again bear in mind costs do vary from country to country.

 

[AnAndAustin]

From the prices given the retail ATI Rad8500 64MB is great for $200, certainly better than the GF3TI200 128MB which isn't worth the extra cash. The Rad9000pro is worse than a Rad8500LE, it's only redeeming feature is its ability to enhance DVD playback with DX8 hw, the Rad9000pro. GF4MX440 is fine for a last resort, it will tide you over nicely for 6-12 months until you can pick up a better card. Given the relatively small price diff and the loss of speed and features IMHO it would be madness to settle for an MX440 though.

Many gfx cards in real games with CPU Scaling (shows the effect of faster CPUs and gfx card combinations)

TomsHW showing Rad9000pro perf relative to GF4MX440, Xabre400, Rad8500 and GF4TI4200 among others

Tech-Report outlining diffs between Rad8500 and Rad9000pro

 

[gtd2000]

I agree with your logic if a "gaming rig" is the intention here.

For me - I would not recommend purchasing a card of a lower or equal specification to a GF2-GTS.

The thinking that I follow now is that you purchase the card that suits the current requirements for gaming needs - remember my GF2 Pro was originally US$300.

The GF2 Pro is no lightning streak nowadays by comparision to the other cards mentioned here - but it is still a "fast" card in the majority of games in real life scenarios. And that is in August 2002.
It can now be picked up as a very useable card for something like US$80. Of course if the MX4 is faster and not significantly more expensive it would be a much better choice indeed.
I'm very much a FPS player - my GTS-V in my secondary system ($50 from newegg) performs like a champ in all the games I play:
Half Life/Counterstrike - and all the other expansions (100fps max with mod)
RTCW
Outbreak
Deus Ex
Red Faction
Quake 2 & 3
Max Payne
MAME32


That was certainly an interesting link regarding the (non!)CPU scaling of the GF2 MX 400. Thats one of the reasons I am sticking with a Duron 1G at 1.2G. It already does the job - upgrading is not a necessity yet. I'm now (supposedly) deciding not to upgrade until I can reach double the speed of my non-overclocked CPU. And that better be at current prices for say an XP1600+

I used to do the "get the fastest card" thing a couple of years ago - it was a complete waste of money really - other than bragging rights. By the time the new games came out that "required" a faster card - the card you bought was already out of date and outgunned by cards that cost the same price you paid 6 months previously

 

[AnAndAustin]

Absolutely, it is easy to get carried away with these things. There is certainly no need at all for anybody with a GF3 or Rad8500 to upgrade to any gfx card out there at the moment, all full DX8 hw cards play all current games excellently and you don't even need one off the fastest CPUs, an Athlon 1.4ghz is more than ample to get excellent perf out of these cards. The Rad9700 seems great, but as you say you need to be very rich or a else a total nutter to buy a gfx card for over US$200/£200. I have always stayed in the £50-100 area except for the 4200-128MB I now possess. I sold my GF2MX400 back in January for £75 in anticipation of getting a GF4TI or a cheap GF3/Rad8500 (GF4 induced price cuts), I was miffed about the GF4MX cards, and double miffed when the 4200 was delayed for 2 whole months. Still I'm glad I waited, for an extra £75 I got myself a 4200-128MB and I couldn't have gotten a GF3TI200 64MB for that back in January. At the end of the day if someones PC does what they need it to and does so adequately fast then they should save some cash and stay put.

 

[kevmev12]

In my haste to get that Radeon 8500 on ebay, I didn't read the description fully and found that the card was actually an A-tek ATi Radeon 8500 64MB... got it for $AUD199. So it's not a "true" ATi Radeon card, I'm just wondering if that will affect anything. Just thinking how silly I am of hoping to get a true ATi Radeon brand new for $AUD199...

 

[AnAndAustin]

Can't comment on the 'A-tek' brand personally but at worst you'll lose 10% perf which would place you at the true ATI Rad8500LE level which is still faster than a GF3TI200 64MB even when the GF3 is o/c'ed to near GF3TI500 levels. Other things which may have been (but not necessarily) compromised are image quality and dual monitor support (reqs 2 RAMDACs).

In any case your card will be no slouch and consider the prices you quoted for the alternatives to your A-Tek Rad8500 64MB AUS$199:

Leadtek A170 GF4 MX440 64MB $180
AOpen GF3Ti200 128Mb for $248
S-Media ATi Radeon 9000 Pro 64Mb for $279

So you'll have better perf than if you'd gone for the GF4MX440 as well as full DX8 hw for only $19 more. The GF3TI200 would be slightly slower even when o/c'ed although the extra 64MB will certainly help in upcoming games it would have cost you an extra $49. Finally the Rad9000 would have been FAR slower than your Rad8500 and would have cost a whopping $80 more! Good buy my friend, be happy because the Rad8500's are one heck of a card.

 

[AnAndAustin]

TechBuy

Sparkle GF4MX440 64MB TVout $165
Powercolor Rad7500 64MB TVout @230/270DDR $214.50 (GF2TI/GF4MX440 perf)
Sparkle GF3TI200 128MB TVout $244.20
Hercules Rad8500LE 64MB TVout $304.70
Sparkle GF4TI4200 64MB $308

I've never used Techbuy but I have used Sparkle products before and they have always seemed excellent. If you want to save some cash then the GF4MX440 for $165 is excellent value, the GF3TI200 128MB is very good for $244, the GF4TI4200 is very clearly the choice if you can afford the $300 price tag. So that Rad8500 on Ebay will be as fast and probably faster than the Rad8500LE listed above which is priced at $106 more!

 

[kevmev12]

Hello. I know the last reply to this post is over 10 days ago but I just want to conclude my original post. I finally got my video card, thanks so much for those who have replied and given me advice.

I did at first 'bought' an A-Tek Readon 8500 from eBay but that transaction fell thru because the seller only accepted PayPal and I had problems signing up and fulfilling the seller's request of paying within 10 days (have to wait for some code in my credit card statement - took too long).

Hence I went back to searching the net and computer shops around Sydney for a video card - I was pretty much on my wit's end because all searches have failed to find a true ATi Radeon 8500. And if there was one available, it was around the $500 mark. And any other Radeon 8500 by other brands were around $265-275. Went to one small shop in Auburn, asked the guy for a Radeon 8500. He said he didn't have one, but he called another store of the same company but different location to see if they have one (bless him for doing that!). He told me there was a Radeon 8500 available there (about 30 minutes away) for $260. So I went there, the manager showed me the card. It was a Gigabyte Radeon 8500 64Mb Deluxe Maya AP retail pack, and he'll sell it to me for $AUD249! It was $49 over my original limit but I was happy to hand over the money for this card as I knew it was worth much more elsewhere. I asked him why he was selling it that cheap, he said he wanted to please the customer! NOW THAT'S SERVICE!

So now my machine is complete, here are the specs:

Athlon XP 2000+
MSI KT3 Ultra2 Motherboard
512Mb DDR PC2100 Kingston ValueRam
Seagate Barracuda 80Gb 7200rpm
Gigabyte Radeon 8500 Deluxe Maya AP
Creative SB Live! DE 5.1 SE
Sony 16x DVD-ROM
LiteOn 40x12x48x CD-RW
17" Philips flatscreen
Windows XP Pro

This thing positively FLIES! The Radeon is running at 275MHz core/275MHz memory clock. DVD playback is beautiful, Serious Sam (one of the prepackaged games) is stunning! Soldier of Fortune and Need for Speed: High Stakes is playing so smoothly, seems like the computer isn't even putting in an effort in running these games (unlike my old computer). I'm sure I can squeeze a bit more performance out of the Radeon if I OC it a little but I just want to enjoy it at the moment - not familiar with OC but I'll learn! I also heard that the Catalyst drivers from ATi would make it even better, is that true? And about the refresh rate, is the higher the better? I'm currently running it at 1024x768 at 75Hz refresh. Is that enough or is it too much? Finally, I just really want to thank everyone for all your help here once again, everyone here has been unbelievably friendly and helpful, you have made a newbie very very happy with his new computer!!!

 

[gtd2000]

Well it is good that you are happy with your purchase

Regarding the refresh rates - I'd say that generally the higher the better.

Essentially try turning the lights off and look to the side of your monitor - use your peripheral vision and if the setting is too low - you will observe "flickering" of the screen.

Basically the more the screen flickers the more eye strain you will get.

I have mine set at 85Hz and I don't "see" any flicker. Obviously it IS "flickering" at 85hz, but your eyes will not find it noticeable

 

[AnAndAustin]

at buy kevmev12, that's one nice setup you've got there and it's nice to get an update.

, higher refresh rates give a better quality image in terms of sharpness and reducing both flickering and eye-strain. The refresh rate you can run at is nearly always limited by your monitor, as you up the res the maximum refresh rate it can use reduces, so you may find your monitor can cope with 800x600 @ 85Hz, 1024x768 @ 75Hz and 1280x1024 @ 65Hz. 75Hz is generally as low as you want to go, certainly when working/reading is very important (as in non-gaming).

're unlikely to get much more out of your Rad8500, 275/275 (275/550 DDR) is about as much as most Rad8500 give, but it never hurts to try. Unless you can get 300/300 type speeds you are prob better off at default as the true perf gains will be pretty small and you don't want to void your warranty for only a very small gain.

O you should always enable/force some Aniso on in your games and then see how far you can get the res and details before things stop being so silky smooth. You should find most games very happy at 1024x768x32 with 16tap Aniso, very nice indeed! Try AA if you wish but you are better off pumping up the res on the Rad8500. Happy gaming