• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Geforce 3 ti 200 or Geforce 4 mx 420?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Defenetly Geforce 3. It has alot more mem and has all the pixelshaders unlike MX cards that doesnt support them. (Thats why MX cards are so cheap) The Ti-200 also has a faster GPU and its a FULL GPU. You could compare them with the Athlon and Duron if u know what i mean :p

Youll get alot higher benchmark scores with the Ti-200 then you would with the MX 420
 
any of the GF3's are faster than a GF4 MX...it's just an overbaked GF2 :D
 
wouldnt it be cool if 3dfx was still around and they came out with a voodoo 6mx or higher, and it was just a smokin fast voodoo 2/3. with like 350mhz+ core/mem clocks.
 
takiwa said:
VERY cool...more competition would benefit us all :D

hopefully matrox will get their end figured out so we can have 3 companies going at it full scale.

nuclear video card war = low cost high fps video cards :D
 
Maxvla said:


hopefully matrox will get their end figured out so we can have 3 companies going at it full scale.

nuclear video card war = low cost high fps video cards :D

Matrox's Parhelia is slow because they packed too many transistors into the core.
 
Penguin4x4 said:


Matrox's Parhelia is slow because they packed too many transistors into the core.

and it's slow cause matrox hasn't built a 3d gaming card in forever.
transistors in the core mean nothing to me... fps means everything (decent quality too).
 
Back