how good is this card for $79?

[dustybyrd]

REFURBISHED: ASUS V8420 Geforce4 Ti4200 128MB 128 bit AGP 4X TV-OUT & DVI
Specifications:
Chipset: Nvidia Geforce4 TI-4200 AGP4X
Memory: 128MB DDR 550MHz 3.3 ns DDR BGA memory
8-Layer PCB
Res: Max 2048 x 1536 at 85Hz (32bpp)
256-bit GeForce4 Ti (250MHz clock)
AGP 4X with Fast Writes and Texturing support
Engine Clock 260MHz
Memory Clock 550MHz(275MHz DDR)
Vertical Refresh Rate 70-240 Hz
User's manual Driver CD ROM, Asus DVD XP, and Hot 3D games included


I'm a noob with video cards, but 3.3ns memory shouldn't i be able to hit at least 300mhz on the memory speed...maybe more?

is this card a good one for a good deal?

 

[Supertrucker]

for the price you cant go wrong, but dont expect much overclock, vid cards and processers tend to get returned for less than desirable oc results (i in no way condone this, but it is fact). still, if your in need of a budget vid card you could do much worse

 

[cursor]

I don't know about the overclock, but that's a pretty good card for the $$. I imagine it would do you proud on dx 8.1 games, and do OK with dx9 at lower resolutions.

 

[dustybyrd]

I don't know about the overclock, but that's a pretty good card for the $$. I imagine it would do you proud on dx 8.1 games, and do OK with dx9 at lower resolutions.

thanks for the replies...

i was doing some research on this card and i noticed that while this card is about as fast as a 9500/9600 on 3dmark2001 (~14000), it is substantially slower on 3dmark2003...(1800 vs 5000)

why? is it because of dx9 games?

and what difference will that make?

 

[Overclocker550]

"Memory: 128MB DDR 550MHz 3.3 ns DDR BGA memory"


thats a ti4400. good deal though and 3dmark2003 is for dx9, but dx9 games can be run faster in dx8 anyway

 

[dustybyrd]

"Memory: 128MB DDR 550MHz 3.3 ns DDR BGA memory"

thats a ti4400. good deal though and 3dmark2003 is for dx9, but dx9 games can be run faster in dx8 anyway

that's funny i was just doing some searches and saw your sig in a post and i thought, that's the guy i should ask!

all those 3dmark scores and such

anyway can you explain the difference between 3dmark2001 and 2003 in real world performance....

specifically i am wondering whether or not you need a good 3dmark2003 score for doom III and those other couple of new games coming out?

also, can these new games be run on this card (if overclocked to 300/600) or not?

thanks again

i am looking to build a cheap system for a friend who will game some...

should i go for a <$100 ti4200 and o/c it (like this one)? or a 9500/9600 for <$150? or ....?

cheap is important here, but running the new games like doom III is too

 

[Overclocker550]

you can get a ti4200 for 1/2 the price of a 9600 and yes any game will run just fine on ti4200s, just dont use aa/af also not all ti4200s overclock the same, some might only do 275/520 its luck

 

[dustybyrd]

you can get a ti4200 for 1/2 the price of a 9600 and yes any game will run just fine on ti4200s, just dont use aa/af also not all ti4200s overclock the same, some might only do 275/520 its luck

what is aa/af in terms of real world difference in current games and in coming games like doom iii, etc...?

 

[Speed_Mechanic2]

You won't be able to play upcoming Half-Life 2 and Doom III using DX9.0 settings, so the games will look not so good. Not sure, but don't the latest 8X AGP GeForce4's support DX8.1? In Half-Life2, there's a fall in graphics between DX8.1 and DX8.0 support.

FPS in DX8.0 or DX8.1 will rival that of the 9600/5600 running in DX8.0 or DX8.1, respectively, mode. Although those cards (the 9600/5600) can run in DX9.0 mode (albeit at a lack of FPS in the 5600's case).

 

[dustybyrd]

You won't be able to play upcoming Half-Life 2 and Doom III using DX9.0 settings, so the games will look not so good.

so an overclocked ti4200 is slightly faster than a 5600 ultra and slightly slower than a 9600 pro (and even more slower than a 9700/9800pro)....

but the ti4200 is the only one without dx9 support....

but what does "the games will look not so good" mean?

how much of a real difference is there?

could a random person watching the games on a monitor discern between the two?

do you have links to screen shots of a dx9 game on a 5600/9600pro versus a ti4200?

 

[harryinny3]

Yes

They will be able to tell the difference. I have both a 4200 and a 9600pro. I can see a big difference in them. Alot of difference if useing AA and AF which if you want some nice graphics without Going to the highest res AA and AF are the ticket. I like my 4200, but love the 9600pro alot. 9500's are nice too.



harry

 

[dustybyrd]

Re: Yes

They will be able to tell the difference. I have both a 4200 and a 9600pro. I can see a big difference in them. Alot of difference if useing AA and AF which if you want some nice graphics without Going to the highest res AA and AF are the ticket. I like my 4200, but love the 9600pro alot. 9500's are nice too.

harry

on what games are you refering too?

also, are you saying that if you using the highest resolution then you don't need to use AA and AF for it to look good? then the question is: can the 4200 handle the highest resolution?

my problem with the 9600pro is that according to many users the drivers don't work well on dual AMD systems

 

[fhanderson]

I have an Asus like the one listed. With good cooling on the memory, look for 675. I mounted an 80mm fan blowing directly on the ramsinks to get 675 without any problems.You should get 660 without any trouble. Probably the reason the card was returned is the core doesn't clock as well as some other ti4200s. Anytime, I set the core over 302 DMark 2001SE would freeze up right away. The card never ran long enough for it to be a heat problem. It still scored 14020 with the core at 302.

 

[dustybyrd]

I have an Asus like the one listed. With good cooling on the memory, look for 675. I mounted an 80mm fan blowing directly on the ramsinks to get 675 without any problems.You should get 660 without any trouble. Probably the reason the card was returned is the core doesn't clock as well as some other ti4200s. Anytime, I set the core over 302 DMark 2001SE would freeze up right away. The card never ran long enough for it to be a heat problem. It still scored 14020 with the core at 302.

Great!

i'm thinking the memory should clock to at least 600 since it's 3.3ns stuff...maybe, hopefully higher...

and even if the core doesn't overclock at all it's still at 260...but it's gotta do at least 275, i would think (just for some stability leeway at 260)....hopefully, and i figure it will do at least 290...

my hope is 290/315 minimum

how did you rig that 80mm fan on the ram heat sinks?

 

[fhanderson]

I used a Zalman bracket and put a bend in it where the fan was under the video card. I bent the first 90 degree bend to 180, this allowed me to mount a fan under the video card. If you don't have room under the card, you can have it blowing from the side of the card.

 

[dustybyrd]

well, i got the card today and tested it...

does 3dmark loops no problem at 300mhz core speed and 650mhz memory speeds...

so i guess that's a pretty good card...

128mb of 3.3ns BGA RAM...

no problems at all