[Gluegun]

Quote:

Originally posted by Raw Kuts alright, so im a dumbass newbie to this stuff.... I thought i was going with ur suggestion because to stoopid people V6 = good, V600 = good + looks better. Its like nvidia puts out GF4s and makes an MX line, people say GF4 = good, GF4MX = good + inexpensive. But the mx version is about on par with GF2s. You can make fun or me as much as you want, but thanks for setting me straigt. I'll be gettin some of the beyer velor pads too.

Well, actually, it's more like "The MDR-V6 is to thh GeForce 4 as the MDR-V600 is to your lame ass one meg crappy trident 2d card"

 

[RMSzero]

Quote:

I say all Nvidia graphics cards suck, unless all you care about is getting the most frames per second and completely disregard image quality. But, that's just me...

Then again, having more frames per second allows you to turn up more graphic quality settings such as resolution or FSAA (whatever is your preference), which, in my book, is an increase of image quality.

Back in the day, nVidia had 32-bit color when 3dfx didn't -- that was all about image quality.

Does Ati have good image quality? Not when they hard-code their drivers to look worse in the interest of speed.

That leaves you with 3dfx and Matrox -- neither of which are anywhere close to catching nVidia as far as quality of any kind anymore, since one of them is gone.

Or did you mean 2d quality? That's dependant on the card manufacturer as well, which nVidia can't control as easily, but in that case yes Ati or Matrox may be better.

</hijack>

 

[radrd]

Go back to Ars A/V Club RMSzero!

BTW: RMSzero is right.

 

[Buddha]

Quote:

Originally posted by Raw Kuts Its like nvidia puts out GF4s and makes an MX line, people say GF4 = good, GF4MX = good + inexpensive. But the mx version is about on par with GF2s.

Actually in terms of "real world" performance the GF4 mx440 is only a few frames behind the very quick GF3 ti200. (and even beats it in some situations!)

Considering your proposed usage, location and price range it seems to me that the v6 would be hard to beat.

Enjoy.

 

[radrd]

Quote:

Actually in terms of "real world" performance the GF4 mx440 is only a few frames behind the very quick GF3 ti200. (and even beats it in some situations!)

http://guru3d.com/review/creative/geforce4mx440/

The only way it is even "almost as fast" is with overclocking, and it would be stupid to buy a card based on overclocking. For the most part, it's about 10 frames behind.

 

[Buddha]

I suggest you polish up your reading and comprehension skills.

The one "real world" benchmark the supposed 'gurus' used prompted the following...

"Now here's where the MX 440 starts to kick some serious butt and does it's work very nicely.

It proofs to be a great card performance wise in Quake III Arena. I mean even at 16x12x32 it manages to do about 67 frames per second which is almost stunning."

Synthetic benchmarks are........ummm ...... synthetic...

 

[radrd]

I did a little more research and I found this review:

http://www.tbreak.com/hard/grfx/msi_gf4mx440/page2.html

I'm actually quite impressed. I unfairly dismissed the MX440 because of price and those synthetic benchmarks at the beginning. It would appear that the MX440 actually does compete with the TI200 and even beats it in Serious Sam. I have a friend who is building a budget box and he is looking into video cards. The MX440 looks like a good option for him.

I wonder how the MX440 overclocks?

 

[Buddha]

They overclock very well actually.

I would reccomend the card Im running, Leadtek A170, comes standard with a very good heatsink and fast ram.. nice bundle of acc...and a very competitive price.

9/10

 

[Driftwood]

Buddha, where are you getting this information?

I use the GeForce2 MX, GeForce3 and Quadro2 Pro on a daily basis for 3D graphics and volume rendering. The GeForce2 MX is several orders of magnitude worse than the GeForce3. There is simply no comparison. All of the benchmarking that I have done has shown that the GeForce3 is a full 2 times faster than the GeForce2 MX.

Audio&Me, why do you say the Nvidia cards have bad quality? I have compared the Nvidia cards directly to a V8 board on a SGI Octane2 and the Nvidia cards look just as nice IMO. I don't see how the nvidia cards would possibly look worse, they are just displaying what they are told....

And btw, the GeForce3 has multi-texturing and a whole gamut of other features that aren't available in Quadro2/GeForce2 cards.

A GeForce4 is on the way, I am eagerly awaiting it.

Driftwood

(sorry this is so off topic)

 

[Buddha]

Dont they teach reading and comprehension in schools any more?

We have been discussing the Geforce 4 mx440...

 

[radrd]

Nevermind.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Audio&Me Do yourself a favor and save up your allowance for a few months and get Sennheiser HD580 + JMT CHA-47 amp (private message a guy named JMT for info), a decent 3.5mm male stereo mini to 3.5mm male stereo mini cable, and some 9V batteries. You won't be dissapointed.

Since his main use for these headphone is gaming, I would disagree with the above. Playing UT, I easily prefer the V6 directly out of my computer to the HD600 out of a Max. If that's not saying something...

 

[Multi]

Remember the Geforce 4 MX is very misleading since it actually is based on the old architecture of the GF 2 MX. If you're expecting the "new" technology of the Geforce 4 when you buy it you're in for a rude awakening...

 

[Driftwood]

Buddha, I am not sure if that last post of yours is aimed at me or not. As far as the GeForce4 MX goes, it is about half of the performance of the GeForce4.

But, the rest of my post still seems relavant in comparing the various cards...

whatever.
Driftwood

 

[Snufkin]

This thread has gone to a really strange place where everyone SEEMS to be communicating in english, but noone understands each other

Geforce 4 = fast and feature packed, but expensive
Geforce4 MX = FAST and featureless, but cheap
Geforce 3 = fast and feature packed, but expensive
Geforce 2 = not that fast compared to other cards available, featureless and average speed
Geforce 2MX = cheap, slow and featureless

You want speed but no dx8 features? gf4mx is it, a turbocharged geforce2mx card with no geforce3 or geforce4 features, they should have called it geforce2 ultra turbo alpha special edition pro millennium platinum ex.

I'd still buy a gf3 over a gf4mx tho.