MX? Ti? DDR? SDR? 64MB? 128MB? WAAAH!!

[josemavicente]

So like I'm trying to upgrade my geforce2Ti 64MB but I dont know what to get!!! I know Ti is better than MX but price-wise, I think MX will win in terms of my choice.. but what's the score? and which MX? the 400? 4200? etc etc etc?

plsu DDR is a lot better than SDR, so definitely ill get that..and 128MB... but whats the real deal with value for money? :)

i really need help! :)

[ski]

The GF4 MX cards have speedy memory and I believe that you can get the 440 with 128MB of memory, but they all have slow core speeds when compared to the TI cards.
This means that games which need a fast core speed in order to render fast frame rates will fall flat on their face, especially if played at higher resolutions(1600x1200, 1280x1024) and with anti-aliasing enabled.

[josemavicente]

so im actually doing ok with my geforce2 ti? will getting a geforce4mx make it faster? or should i just change my ram to ddr since im using sd. my MB supports both.2 slots for each.

[ski]

Actually, I was referring to the current TI cards, like the 4200, 4400, and 4600.

Upgrading your system depends on your current performance, and whether or not you're satisfied with it.

For instance, if your system can maintain a minimum of 30-40 fps(frames per second) in all of your gaming applications with your selected resolution, color depth, and game settings, and give smooth action, then you may not need to upgrade anything.

On the other hand, if you're seeing less than 30 fps, getting choppy performance, and you do not want to reduce the resolution, color depth, or game settings to improve performance, then upgrading your video card is the most effective way of improving performance, followed by upgrading the memory and/or the CPU(and perhaps the MB).
A CPU upgrade is required if you install a state of the art video card(GF4 TI 4600, ATI 9700, etc.), and your current CPU speed is less than 1 GHz. In this case the slow CPU will become a bottleneck, and the video card will not achieve its full performance potential.

This article presents an overview on the specs and performance of a slew of video cards manufactured over the past few years, and it will give you some insight into which cards perform better than others:
http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20020418/index.html
One strange thing you'll notice is that the frame rates of the GF3 TI 200 are faster than those of the GF2 TI in all of the test results in spite of the GF3 TI 200's core speed(175 MHz) being slower than that of the GF2 TI(250 MHz), and both having the same type and speed memory.
The reason for this is due to improved processes which were used during the manufacture of the GF3 TI 200's graphics chip.

You can check current prices for all of the cards at www.pricewatch.com.

[josemavicente]

im actually running a pretty decent system... athlon 1800 running at 1.53ghz...geforce2ti, nearly 400mhz of SD RAM.

where do you see your framerate performance?

[ski]

With your setup, I highly recommend that you upgrade your video card to at least a GF4 TI 4200(and preferably a better one if you're a diehard gamer).
That GF2 TI is a bottleneck which is not allowing your system to reach its full gaming potential.
A better video card will give you great frame rates playing most of the current games at higher resolutions, 32 bit color, anti-aliasing enabled, and maxed game settings.
Plus, the graphics engines in future games are going to be more sophisticated, and require more and more power in order to properly play.


My system consists of the same CPU as yours, 512MB of PC2100 DDR, and a GF4 TI 4400.
The only games I play are the MS Combat Flight Simulator series(1, 2, and 3).
I'm able to get frame rates of 60 fps using 1600x1200 resolution, 32 bit color depth, 2X anti-aliasing, and all game settings maxed in CFS 1 and 2.
And the frame rates would go higher except that they're limited to 60 fps since my monitor's refresh rate cannot be run higher than 60 Hz at 1600x1200 without possibly damaging it.
CFS 3 is a different animal though. It has a monster graphics engine which brings my system to its knees(15 fps) if I use the same settings as in CFS 1 and 2.
However, I'm able to maintain around 30 fps using 1280x1024, 16 bit color, 2X AA, and medium game settings.
And I'm not about to upgrade my system again(spent big bucks upgrading it a year ago) just to be able to run this game at higher frame rates with higher settings. The action is smooth, and I'm happy with the way the game plays and how things look.
However, when CFS 4 arrives........

[BigBlue66]

I agree. Don't consider anything less than a GF4 Ti 4200. You can get some nowadays for $100-$150 or so. You may as well get a card with 128mb of memory onboard, as newer games will start making use of more and more memory.

Upgrading to DDR on your motherboard would also help, but by how much is debatable.

[josemavicente]

where can you check the fps your computer is running at?

i guess its the geforce4ti then! :)

as for my RAM i still have doubts about upgrading to DDR because i really dont know by how much it will improve. will the future DDR2 make use of the same RAM slots in the motherboard or will it require a new MB altogether?

[ski]

Check your games' instructions on how to view the frame rate.

[banshee56]

The post about the CPU being a bottle neck is important. I recently upgraded from a Powercolor GF2 GTS 64 DDR to a Gainward GF4 Ti4200 128DDR 8xAGP running with a P3 933 and 384 PC133. My 3DMark scores went from low 3000's to high 5000's, which really isn't that much of an improvement. I have seen guys getting scores well above 10,000 with the Ti4200, so my problem is the CPU. 128DDR probably isn't as important to games, but I got it for use with graphics software and SolidEdge 3D modeling software. Before, with my GF2 GTS 64DDR, I really didn't have many games problems, except for a few of the newer ones. The GF4 definitely helped, but the CPU can be just as important.