The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I just can't find anybody who has this flippin card. I have one on its way to me and want some no nonsense info on it from someone who has got one in there machine.
Page:
Ya see Reaper, I had a Geforce2 MX (the original Prophet with 32meg of SDRAM) for well over a year and kind of missed out the top-end Geforce2's and 3's altogether.
So, hopefully, this Geforce4 should last me the same length of time again. :)
Oh, and Pantoffel? Forget it.
So, hopefully, this Geforce4 should last me the same length of time again. :)
Oh, and Pantoffel? Forget it.
MX440 is still a perfectly good card - excellent considering the price they can be found for, and still a sensible choice for a gamer. I still have GF2mxs in two of my boxen, and they cope with gmes perfectly well; as long as you don't expect everything to run at highest res/detail, the MX range will do you well. Never really bothered benching them with anything, ti500 still sits in here and stops me upgrading to any of the GF4s - why bother, Q3 over 100fps at 1600x1200, any new game highest res...the GF4 Tis just dont show a significant improvement.
Goat-Rider wrote:
> Pantoffel wrote:
Anyway, a GeForce 2 MX 440 is
> a decent enough graphics
> card, and as long as it can run all my games, I don't
> care.
There is no
> such thing as a geforce 2 mx440 its either a geforce 2 mx400 or a geforce 4
> mx440 just thought I would add that to the discussion :)
Ok, my mistake. I noticed just after I posted it, so forgive me :0)
'Pantoffel, get out. Now. You said you have a monster of a PC. Your graphics card is part of your system specifications. Your graphics card is not a monster. Therefore, your PC is also not a monster.'
Incorrect my friend. Never did I once say that my graphics card is good. Look, it's the principal of the thing. What if I just used it for media editing or just for typing and it ran incredibly fast, then it would still be a monster.
'And yes, it's GF2 MX400, not 440. Get it right.'
As I said, my mistake.
'But if it's good enough for your games (Age of Empires, etc), fair enough. :)'
You're an idiot. Stop throwing your knowledge around like that. I'm one to admit when I'm wrong, but I think you're being out of line here. Yes, you may know more about graphics cards, but I can guarantee that I know more about media editing than you. So, don't think I'm stupid just because I make a mistake on one subject, because that's just flaming hypocricy. I also think that you're being a little too hard on me. I never once tried to cause offence to you until you offended me, so if you just kindly pointed it out, there wouldn't have been a problem.
And no, I have games like Medal of Honour: Allied Assault and will be getting GTA3, so suck on that, idiot.
> Pantoffel wrote:
Anyway, a GeForce 2 MX 440 is
> a decent enough graphics
> card, and as long as it can run all my games, I don't
> care.
There is no
> such thing as a geforce 2 mx440 its either a geforce 2 mx400 or a geforce 4
> mx440 just thought I would add that to the discussion :)
Ok, my mistake. I noticed just after I posted it, so forgive me :0)
'Pantoffel, get out. Now. You said you have a monster of a PC. Your graphics card is part of your system specifications. Your graphics card is not a monster. Therefore, your PC is also not a monster.'
Incorrect my friend. Never did I once say that my graphics card is good. Look, it's the principal of the thing. What if I just used it for media editing or just for typing and it ran incredibly fast, then it would still be a monster.
'And yes, it's GF2 MX400, not 440. Get it right.'
As I said, my mistake.
'But if it's good enough for your games (Age of Empires, etc), fair enough. :)'
You're an idiot. Stop throwing your knowledge around like that. I'm one to admit when I'm wrong, but I think you're being out of line here. Yes, you may know more about graphics cards, but I can guarantee that I know more about media editing than you. So, don't think I'm stupid just because I make a mistake on one subject, because that's just flaming hypocricy. I also think that you're being a little too hard on me. I never once tried to cause offence to you until you offended me, so if you just kindly pointed it out, there wouldn't have been a problem.
And no, I have games like Medal of Honour: Allied Assault and will be getting GTA3, so suck on that, idiot.
How long can it take to even get the right damn graphics card - the MX440 is a gf4, if you don't know that, you shouldn't be telling him about it. MX400 was a version of the gf2, the high end of their budget range, comparable to the orignal MXs.
The GF4mx is fairly poor in all its flavours, it can be outperformed in actual gaming by GF2 Ultras, and lacks the nFiniteFX II engine the rest of the GF4s have. That said, it's probably the best way to go for a budget card at the moment. The rest of the GF4 range is good, but not hugely better than the GF3s - an overclocked Ti500 owns, to the point where the difference in performance between that and a gf4ti is not nearly enough to justify the price, especially as you can get some quality second hand cards now as people upgrade to maintain their braggin' rites.
The GF4mx is fairly poor in all its flavours, it can be outperformed in actual gaming by GF2 Ultras, and lacks the nFiniteFX II engine the rest of the GF4s have. That said, it's probably the best way to go for a budget card at the moment. The rest of the GF4 range is good, but not hugely better than the GF3s - an overclocked Ti500 owns, to the point where the difference in performance between that and a gf4ti is not nearly enough to justify the price, especially as you can get some quality second hand cards now as people upgrade to maintain their braggin' rites.
Weird Kid wrote:
> Albert, just wondering what is your GF4 Ti4400 like, is it worth the
> money?
The GF4 Ti4400, as you can probably imagine, is a true beast. The Ti4600 basically just has a higher GPU clock speed and RAM clock speed.
I paid something like £250 for my Creative Ti4400 and the Ti4600s are well in the £300s, so I wouldn't bother at the mo. If you've got the cash to spare, don't hesitate to go for mine.
> Albert, just wondering what is your GF4 Ti4400 like, is it worth the
> money?
The GF4 Ti4400, as you can probably imagine, is a true beast. The Ti4600 basically just has a higher GPU clock speed and RAM clock speed.
I paid something like £250 for my Creative Ti4400 and the Ti4600s are well in the £300s, so I wouldn't bother at the mo. If you've got the cash to spare, don't hesitate to go for mine.
Slippers wrote:
> I have a cool graphics card in both my PC's. In this one I have a GeForce 4 MX
> 440 64MB DDR. Now, thats a card and it came with my Special Reserve PC (thanks
> Special Reserve!!) But in my other PC I have a GeForce 2 Ultra 64MB which can
> out do the GF4 MX 440. If u have the GeForce 2 Ultra, hang onto it coz its
> cool. Hmmmm, i shall be investing in a GeForce 4 Ti 4600 sometime, now that
> card would make your PC the daddy.
Geforce 4= Cut down version of the geforce mx...
> I have a cool graphics card in both my PC's. In this one I have a GeForce 4 MX
> 440 64MB DDR. Now, thats a card and it came with my Special Reserve PC (thanks
> Special Reserve!!) But in my other PC I have a GeForce 2 Ultra 64MB which can
> out do the GF4 MX 440. If u have the GeForce 2 Ultra, hang onto it coz its
> cool. Hmmmm, i shall be investing in a GeForce 4 Ti 4600 sometime, now that
> card would make your PC the daddy.
Geforce 4= Cut down version of the geforce mx...
But surely you can have a monster of a PC while still having a 64MB MX 400? THats what I got anyway, with an AMD XP1800+ and 512 MB of DDR Ram.
Page: