$6 Different!!!

[Deagle]

Hey guys, I'm trying to decide what to get between a GF4 ti4200(Chaintech) and a GF3 ti200(Gainward). The price diff is only $6 so it should be obvious which one is better. But then when I read the reviews,its like 50% of the ti4200 cards is dead on arrival or go bad in matter of a week.

As for the GF3 I read the reviews at Anandtech and that specific card, made by Gainward, won the Editor's Award. Plus in the user's reviews a lot of people said that its a good card.

Now I'm having second thoughts about getting the ti4200 and is in need of this board's opinions.

So please, anyone that knows or have use both of these cards or even one of them. Give me some advice.

Thanx ALL.;)

PS: Here's the link (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=48&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=3101,3677) for the GF3 and the ti4200 (http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?catalog=48&DEPA=1&submit=property&mfrcode=0&propertycode=&propertycodevalue=3107,3677) (Its the 1st one.)

[BigBlue66]

If the Chaintech boards are bad, get a different brand, but definitely opt for a GF4 Ti 4200 over a GF3 Ti 200. No contest there.

I have two Gainward/Cardexpert GF4 Ti 4200's, one is a non-Golden Sample 64mb and other is a Golden Sample 128mb, both are 8X AGP. They are very reliable and fast cards.

[Deagle]

Hmm ohh I forgot to say, this is the video card that will br included in my list of new parts that I will buy and if I go above $100 then I won't have much to spend for anything else. So those two are basically my only options.
Thanx for the reply.;)

[BigBlue66]

Oh, OK. Well, I would still go for the GF4 Ti 4200. It will have capabilities that the GF3 Ti 200 won't have, even if it is a Golden Sample.

Newegg has an oustanding RMA service, so if the Chaintech doesn't work, return it.

I have heard of bad boards from Gainward in the early days, but haven't heard anything about bad Chaintech boards. Still, I think I would take my chances on the Chaintech.

[Deagle]

Hmm ok bigblue, I think I get what your saying. But I have some questions.
1-If I have to RMA it back, do I have to pay for shipping?
2-You that the ti4200 have some capabilities that the GF3 don't have. Can you list some important ones?
That's all..THANX:p

[BigBlue66]

1) Yes, you would pay shipping. But, a video card doesn't weigh very much. Ship it UPS Ground. That's pretty cheap.

2) Too many things to mention here. Don't know if you have run the 3DMark01SE benchmarking program, but that's a good way to see the differences. I can't remember what all the tests do, but some won't run on GF3 while they do run on the GF4. Probably something about vertex shading and all that.

Do a search on the net for comparisons between the two boards. You're bound to come up with some hits.

[squarenuts]

The 4200 is a lot newer card. That why its a Geforce 4 as the other one was the Geforce 3. Both card are the value type. The GF4 have gone up to 4600 - 4800. While the GF3 went up to 500. The Geforce 3 wasn't too popular because the the GF4 came out so quickly.

Go to Nvidia.com they have a break down of whole family.

[iisbob]

Definitely go with the G4 Ti4200, even tho briefly the G3 Ti series was in the spotlight and still do great with most games, the better NV25 GPU and chipset structure of the G4 Ti4200 series beats it especially in more modern games at higher resolutions.

If you can find a 5200 Ultra GFX, for under $130->it makes a good replacement for even the aging Ti4200 as it provides the same performance at high resolutions with a newer GPU and outperforms the Ti4200 when you enable AA/8X ansio.

I have several LAN gaming systems i used to run Ti4200's on; i upgraded them to the GFX 5200 ultra from PNY, and they play just a well, even better in the IQ dept. with higher resolutions and running 4 AA/8X ansio.


Be aware tho that today's modern games rely much more heavily upon CPU & Memory than they used to, gone are the days of a couple of years ago when you could simply upgrade your Video card and get massive leaps of performance; a lot of your games performance will rely on the quality of your system-anything less than an XP 1700+ or P4 celey at 1.4 and your not going to reap much benefits from upgrading your video card if you're trying to play games like UT2k3, RTCW MOHA or Batlefield 1942.

[Deagle]

Hmm about your comment that the FX5200 Ultra can outperform or even beat a ti4200 when AA and 8X is turn on. Do you have a link where I can see it or is this from your personal experience? I have been under the impression that the FX5600, yes, FX5600:eek: is still slower than a ti4200 but when AA and AF is turn on, the ti4200 can't keep up with it.

Well I'm not to fond of the FX5200 or its cousin the FX5200Ultra since I've read that those were like the GF4MX when the TI series was release.:rolleyes: But it's hard to find a 5200Ultra for under $130 nowadays...:( Oh well since I'm looking to cut cost I might as well go with the ti4200 at newegg.;)

THANX for all of the replies.:p

[iisbob]

As I recall there was a review over at CNET on the very PNY ultra series that I purchased; yet I'm going to give you some advice-reviews are extremely biased towards always comparing apples with oranges-none of the so called synthetic programs like 3dmark actually give you any true indication of how a piece of hardware will perform in a real game situation or in your specific PC.

The problem is that so many people fall into the routine of taking what they see at this reviewer's sites as gospel; even when the reviewer tells you that their tests are subjective ( at least the good ones do ) people still take it as " law ".

I get so sick and tired of people telling me that they got their info from a " reliable " site and who am I?! Well, to know something is reliable you have to have had experience with the same or similar hardware that is being tested-if not then you are plagiarizing the testers results and exposing your own ignorance. I happen to be financially able to purchase and personally test most of the products I see when they are available, and form my own opinions on the results.

Now my personal experience, and the experiences of people I let play on my LAN setup is that the 5200 Ultra performs in games with better IQ than the previous Ti4200's I had-and I'm running them at higher resolutions with no noticeable stuttering. Mind you now I said Ultra not the generic 5200 or the 64 bit ones-major difference.

Now in truth I use a 9700 pro-no comparison to it and a 5200/5600/9600 series; I like to game seriously and I like my games to look good while playing at the smoothest rate possible, and quite frankly I think the 9700 pro is currently the best-I'll jump on the R400 & the new NV38-40's when they come out-just because I can. :)

Of course as I stated above you can't expect modern cards to give you any real boost unless you have at least a reasonable newer system. The LAN gamers I have are based on the 1 time great SIS 735 chipset-they still roll right along.

I'm not championing any card here, just passing on my personal experience-of the two cards you gave as choices, I suggested to you in this case the obvious best one based on the technology they represent. You should not take my word as gospel either-it's just my review of actual hardware I own.