View Full Version : GF4 4200Ti 64Mb or 128Mb?
Looking to run UT 2003 a bit faster on my PC!
Specs:
Athlon 950
Asus K7V
256Mb PC100 Ram
Can't really stretch to getting a new Motherboard, CPU memory etc so was thinking of getting a 4200Ti.
Notice that they are available in two flavours-
64Mb (250 MHz Chip Clock/500 MHz Memory Clock) £106
128Mb (250 MHz Chip Clock/444 MHz Memory Clock) £119
Basically wondered if there's any advantage getting the 128Mb version. In several benchmark tests(taken from http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020409/geforce4ti4200-04.html) the 64Mb actually comes out better than the 128Mb version, presumably due to it's memory clock being faster. I just don't see the point in spending the extra on the 128Mb or am I missing something?
Did you not see this at the bottom of the graph's.
* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.
Looks like newer, more demanding games really benefit from the extra memory even though it's more slowly clocked.
http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q3/ti4200s/index.x?pg=11
Decision made.
Answered my own question.
Damn.
dave_s13
29-10-2002, 11:36
I'd say your existing MB and pc100 RAM will be a bottleneck.
Spend the money on a new MB and some pc2700 DDR ram, you'll notice more of a difference with that.
Addmittedly it will take a bit more messing around to get set up.
Mr_Sukebe
29-10-2002, 11:48
As you mention, the basic differences in speed on Quake 3 are almost certainly down to the difference in memory clock speed.
The additional memory would only be useful for games using VERY large textures. I don't know of any games presently making use of this option.
I think the answer has to be:
- If you're going to upgrade this card in under another year, go with the 64mb option and have a few pints with the change.
- If you intend to keep the card for 2-3 years, spend the extra cash to future proof yourself against potential requirements.
Me, I bought a 64mb version...
BTW, DON'T buy a Gainward card. I had two Ti4200s, both of which had stability issues. In the end the retailer happily changed it to a Leadtek card, which has been rock solid.
BTW, DON'T buy a Gainward card. I had two Ti4200s, both of which had stability issues. In the end the retailer happily changed it to a Leadtek card, which has been rock solid.
:eek: Wow! The Gainward NVIDIA cards have been the "daddy" for a while, stable even when overclocked.
Mr_Sukebe
29-10-2002, 14:25
Why do you think I bought a Gainward unit?
Check back on new in the Inquirer and you'll find that Gainward issued a notice to all resellers stating that they're change with "NO QUIBBLES" any 4200 series card that was found to have stability issues.
My guess is that they screwed up in their initial designs or manufacturing.
Question is whether you believe they have updated the design to solve the problem.
As a description of the problem, after a reasonable lenght of time running and on an intermittent basis (though getting worse with age), the card would suddenly display a scrambled image and completely lock up the PC.
Both Gainward card had same issue. I've not experienced ANY problems with the leadtek replacement.
Papa Lazarou
29-10-2002, 18:40
Originally posted by Fizzy
:eek: Wow! The Gainward NVIDIA cards have been the "daddy" for a while, stable even when overclocked.
Think the Albatron cards are quickly getting a bit of a reputation too. Thing is their top of the line Ti4200's (Turbo P++ or whatever its called) seem almost as expensive as a cheap-o Ti4600
I was going to get a Gainward "golden sample" card but I'm in two minds now..
The only noticable difference having 128mb over 64mb is at higher resolutions, but with what yout spec of machine is you wont be playing over 1024 x 768 x 16bit anyway. like it has already been stated, it would be worth your while upgrading your processor, and ram too, since prices of components are so low.
I am currently running a Geforce 4 Ti 4600 with 128Mb, 512Mb system ram, and an Atlon 1800xp which has been overclocked, and the processor is the bottleneck in the system :(
Take a look at the ATI Radeon Family.
I have a Radeon 8500 64MB (Not the LE model) and it plays all games i have a very high res with no problems and looks good.
But as mentioned earlier i think you would be better to upgrade the other components as well.
C.
The Ti4x00 will piss on the Radeon from a great height.
I know what you mean about the cpu being the bottleneck.
Im running
XP 2100+ @ 1820Mhz
Sparkle GF4 Ti4600
512MB 2700DDR
WinXP
Clocking the processor made quite a difference in performance (even only an 80Mhz overclock). Aaaah, I remember when the P60 was top of the range :) Umm anyhow, yes my CPU is STILL the bottleneck :(
12650 3dMarks btw :P
Dave
Papa Lazarou
30-10-2002, 12:45
Radeon 9700 Pro seems to be the daddy now and completely trounces all GF4's in all the benchmarks. Too expensive though.
Yep,
No arguments there,
When I said Radeon I was talking about the 8500. Which was competition for the GF3 at the time. The 9700 Pro is lovely but I still wouldn't buy an ATI due to dodgy driver support. Nvidia are great about this.
Dave
dave_s13
30-10-2002, 13:37
Originally posted by DStretch
12650 3dMarks btw :P
Dave
Good score:D :D
Originally posted by dave_s13
I'd say your existing MB and pc100 RAM will be a bottleneck.
Spend the money on a new MB and some pc2700 DDR ram, you'll notice more of a difference with that.
Addmittedly it will take a bit more messing around to get set up.
At the mo I can only really stretch to a 1800XP together with associated MB & RAM(Approx £200 all in from Ebuyer).
The Innovision 4200 128Mb comes in at under £120 (BTW why is this card so cheap - anyone have any experience of it?)
Have been comparing my Madonion 2001SE benchmark with the online results browser(I obviously have too much spare time at work!). From what I can see the 3dmark score should be approximately doubled(~3150>6700) by installing the Ti4200. However installing the 1800XP will only increase the score by around a half(~3150>4600).
Obviously if money were no object then I'd buy both(but I've just bought Eagle F1s!). It seems to me that a Ti4200 would be a decent budget upgrade.
What d'ya recon?
Filmidget
30-10-2002, 13:41
Bought an MSi Ti4200 128mb a week ago, to go on my 3 week old 2000XP machine...
I have nothing to compare it to - but it is GREAT!! :)
Been playing Medal of Honour 1024xwhatever on full detail etc and it runs lovely :)
And hasn't half improved my Counterstrike after previously using a K6-2 500 with a 16mb card :cool:
Cheers, Phil
Filmidget
30-10-2002, 13:42
Originally posted by Filmidget
Bought an MSi Ti4200 128mb a week ago, to go on my 3 week old 2000XP machine...
I have nothing to compare it to - but it is GREAT!! :)
Been playing Medal of Honour 1024xwhatever on full detail etc and it runs lovely :)
And hasn't half improved my Counterstrike after previously using a K6-2 500 with a 16mb card :cool:
EDIT: plus the driver software includes a facility to overclock the card (but can't see the point at the moment!)
Cheers, Phil
EDIT AGAIN! : Sorry that went horribly wrong - see what a PC f*ckwit I am and I even installed the card myself without any probs...
dave_s13
30-10-2002, 13:44
My theory for why Innovision stuff is cheap; I think they basically buy in the GPU's from ATI or whoever and stick em on their boards.
Its sort of like buying a Skoda, crap name but still very good.
S'pose just upgrading the card will be OK, at least you can get a new MB/RAM/CPU when your new tyres have worn out a bit.
Do a before and after benchmark and let us know how much more oomph you get.
Originally posted by dave_s13
Good score:D :D
Thanks :)
A 4200 would be a good buy if you want to overclock as well, because they tend to clock higher than the 4600s do :eek: . My 4600 is pathetic for clocking. I just left it stock :( A new GF4 card will do you justice but will be even better when you upgrade the rest of your machine.
Dave
Well I can genuinely say that that was a productive day at "work".
I'll go for the Ti4200 128Mb and post the results when it eventually arrives(Ebuyer are listing 10 days for stock!).
Cheers all!
Have you tried www.aria.co.uk ?
Originally posted by DStretch
Yep,
No arguments there,
When I said Radeon I was talking about the 8500. Which was competition for the GF3 at the time. The 9700 Pro is lovely but I still wouldn't buy an ATI due to dodgy driver support. Nvidia are great about this.
Dave
Hmm, not sure about that - my boss recently put together a total *daddy* of a machine:
P4 2.8
1024MB of DDR333 mem
Radeon 9700
SB Audigy Platinum EX
Asus P4PE board
SCSI throughout
etc etc
All this lot hasn't crashed *once*, and with no overclocking or tweaks or anything (it's his work machine as well), on 3D Mark it scores over 14,500! :eek: :eek:
I've got a Athlon 2100+, GF4 4600, 12 DDR333, Audigy, Abit KX7-333R board, and only score 10,300. Having said that, I reckon the Audigy, GF4 and VIA chipset board are all conflicting slightly, plus I've not overclocked mine either (it's also my work machine).
Oh yes, no problems with that, the 9700 is the ********, it's just ATI isn't exactly known for its driver support!!! they'll release some when they can be bothered. Nice score there btw :)
Thief
Originally posted by dave_s13
My theory for why Innovision stuff is cheap; I think they basically buy in the GPU's from ATI or whoever and stick em on their boards.
Its sort of like buying a Skoda, crap name but still very good.
S'pose just upgrading the card will be OK, at least you can get a new MB/RAM/CPU when your new tyres have worn out a bit.
Do a before and after benchmark and let us know how much more oomph you get.
Just got the Ti4200 128Mb installed with 3082 Nvida drivers(on UT 2003 disc) and am pleased:
3Dmark 2001SE @ 1024*768*32
GeForce 2: 3144
GeForce 4: 6119
UT 2003 standard Benchmark@ 1024*768*32
GeForce 2
-Flyby: 37
-Botmatch: 20
GeForce 4
-Flyby: 76
-Botmatch: 26
Makes a real differnce to playing UT 2003. Money well spent!
Right, if you liked that, go install the 40.71s or 41.03s :) now check your 3dmark score / UT2003 benchmark :)
www.guru3d.com for the drivers btw.
Dave
My PC is the Daddy to ;)
Geforce 4600ti (MSI)
Asus P4 845G motherboard
512mb - (Soon to be 1gig) - of DDR333
P4 2.533 Processor
Adaptec 29160N SCSI Card
1x 36 Gig IBM Ultra 160 Hard Drive
1x 18 Gig IBM Ultra 160 Hard Drive
Plextor 40x Ultra SCSI CDROM
Pioneer 10x DVD SCSI (slot load)
Soundblaster Platyer 5.1
And Unreal Tournament 2003 runs like a dream with antialiasing on :D
Martin T
07-11-2002, 18:42
Originally posted by Keith_C
Hmm, not sure about that - my boss recently put together a total *daddy* of a machine:
P4 2.8
1024MB of DDR333 mem
Radeon 9700
SB Audigy Platinum EX
Asus P4PE board
SCSI throughout
etc etc
All this lot hasn't crashed *once*, and with no overclocking or tweaks or anything (it's his work machine as well), on 3D Mark it scores over 14,500! :eek: :eek:
I've got a Athlon 2100+, GF4 4600, 12 DDR333, Audigy, Abit KX7-333R board, and only score 10,300. Having said that, I reckon the Audigy, GF4 and VIA chipset board are all conflicting slightly, plus I've not overclocked mine either (it's also my work machine).
Bas tard.:D :D :D
I'm stuck with a 1 gig P3 and Geforce 2 Ultra!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.