55fps with fx5900/256mb

[JemyM]

Lord Kane
Do you agree that MX cards are not suitable for Direct X 8 or Direct X 9 gaming... that they are advertised as "office cards" from the one that created them... and that they are built on the geforce core, but that they use the lowest quality memory to make them cheap, which effectively crop their chances of competing, speedwise, with cards meant for gaming.

[kenmasters1983]

hushy pushy i get those framerates with fps limit on with it off i get

200 fps with it off....

also on unreal tournament 2003 at 1024x768 i get 64 fps on default detail level.

jemy your just an annoying noob...my card plays alls the latest computer games fine.. i will worry about another cad when the ti4200's come down in price

[Kane]

Originally Posted by JemyM

Lord Kane
Do you agree that MX cards are not suitable for Direct X 8 or Direct X 9 gaming... that they are advertised as "office cards" from the one that created them... and that they are built on the geforce core, but that they use the lowest quality memory to make them cheap, which effectively crop their chances of competing, speedwise, with cards meant for gaming.

Yes the MX cards are not suited for gaming. If you have to use one, they may seem nice until you try a real graphics card

[JemyM]

Look kenmasters1983.
You sound like a guy with that tries to impress hells angels with a moped, and then whine when they tell you to quit joking.

For UT2003, with everything turned up to the max, I get 110fps in 1600x1200 and about 200 fps in 1024x768.

And if that wasnt enough, that also includes full support for all Direct X 8 and Direct X 9 features, which makes the game look *very* different from what you see with a mx card.


But I doubt you have any frigid idea what Direct X, 3d Mark, T&L, Enviromental Mapping, Bumpmapping, Anisotrophic filthering, ddr etc means.. do you? And yes. Thoose where the simple words, and they all deeply tells the truth about your problem.

[JemyM]

Lord Kane:
Thanks. I am glad that we cleared that part.

I am also aware that I can get past 60fps in Half Life 1 in 800x600 with a voodoo 2...

[JemyM]

And I do not wish to sound as a jackass, but I also am not happy about being flamed when I do valid, but friendly comment about a certain graphiccard.

[kenmasters1983]

your just tyring to be smartass arent you??

i get 5000 points in 3d mark 2001 and my video cards memory is DDR so just return from whence you came demon..

nvidia only calls it an office card today.. 3 years ago it was considered a gaming card everything changes with time.

nvidia calling my card an office card is like sony claiming theyre BS2 is the strongest of three systems...

maybe you still dont see what i am getting at but wait another 4 years nvidia will be saying the ti 4600's are office cards....

BTW this is the last time i am gonna post in this thread cause i know where this is going and thier no reason for us to be arguing over a stupid video card..so peace out...

[Kane]

nvidia calling my card an office card is like sony claiming theyre BS2 is the strongest of three systems...

The PS2 is the strongest of the 3 systems. It's number one in every country isn't it
It's also not as weak as you say it is.
The geForce4 MX was released as a budget card from day one. A cheap card not designed to get the most out of gaming and that was how it was always marketed.

maybe you still dont see what i am getting at but wait another 4 years nvidia will be saying the ti 4600's are office cards....

No, nVidia will stop promoting them, just like they did with the geforce 3 and 2

[Exophase]

Uh.. all you guys who say the MX cards aren't suited for gaming are exaggerating. Yes, they have no DX8/9 support, but that's okay because those games _still_ aren't mainstream yet, and most games people are playing right now aren't going to be using it heavily. So it's fine for most games today. Any 3D card is suited for gaming. These are simply value gaming cards. They're for the people who don't want to pay as much for more casual gaming. They're not "office cards", that's absurd. They're not aimed at businesses at all; they can buy much cheaper 2D only cards (yes, you can still get them). They probably won't even be using AGP cards, and last I checked all the recent MX cards are AGP.

So, just because someone wasn't fortunate enough to own a $150+ card a few months ago (for many people that's a lot of money, especially for a graphics card. Isn't that what a new console costs?) doesn't mean they don't play any games. And just because the card lacks DX8/9 doesn't mean it's not a "real" graphics card. Yes, the MX cards weren't future proofed at all, and that was a mistake of nVidia's. But that doesn't mean they're completely useless.

Originally Posted by Lord Kane

The geForce4 MX was released as a budget card from day one. A cheap card not designed to get the most out of gaming and that was how it

And you do realize that there's a huge difference between "budget 3D card" and "office card", right? No, it wasn't designed to get the MOST out of gaming, nothing but their high end cards are, and even then... Yes, it was a budget card from day one. That doesn't mean it wasn't meant for gaming, it simply wasn't meant for hardcore gamers. What kind of non-gamer would buy one? Where do you all get this idea?

- Exo

[JemyM]

Originally Posted by kenmasters1983

i get 5000 points in 3d mark 2001 and my video cards memory is DDR so just return from whence you came demon..
nvidia only calls it an office card today.. 3 years ago it was considered a gaming card everything changes with time.
nvidia calling my card an office card is like sony claiming theyre BS2 is the strongest of three systems...
maybe you still dont see what i am getting at but wait another 4 years nvidia will be saying the ti 4600's are office cards....
BTW this is the last time i am gonna post in this thread cause i know where this is going and thier no reason for us to be arguing over a stupid video card..so peace out...

Perhaps you should learn to listen to thoose who know more?

mx was listed as their 'office alternative' since it came. It have always been their 'scaled down' 'office' card, since the GPU itself is cheaper to produce than the memory. Their budget gaming card in that era was GeForce Ti4200. And no, they do not list their card as something else, they remove the card from their website and stop selling it.

5000 mark means that you use 3dMark 2001, not 3d Mark 2003.
3dMark 2001 is outdated. I get past 21000 points in 3dMark 2001. I got 9500 with my old GeForce 3 Ti500.

MX 4 440 get between 200-250 3dmark in 3dMark 2003.
I get past 8000.

[shadow_tj]

mx cards have less speed on the pipelines and hasn`t ddr2 memmory ok thats true.
bu its a ok card for people wo don`t have the money to buy a high end graphic card.

we yust buy now a mx card and wait a few years and then buy a high end card there was a yer ago that is cheaper then buy the latest card there is.

better buy a cheaper card and when the price is right 2 buy a card that has proven hisself then buy the latest and find out that the other was the one you needed at the end... hight end cards are expensive and there are comming new cards every month. and none of them are perfect ... wait a half year and you know what card is better...
its easy cheaper and you don`t spend hunderd of dollars on a card that has bugs that will be fixed in software or a other version.

[JemyM]

Originally Posted by Exophase

Uh.. all you guys who say the MX cards aren't suited for gaming are exaggerating. Yes, they have no DX8/9 support, but that's okay because those games _still_ aren't mainstream yet, and most games people are playing right now aren't going to be using it heavily. So it's fine for most games today. Any 3D card is suited for gaming. These are simply value gaming cards. They're for the people who don't want to pay as much for more casual gaming. They're not "office cards", that's absurd. They're not aimed at businesses at all; they can buy much cheaper 2D only cards (yes, you can still get them). They probably won't even be using AGP cards, and last I checked all the recent MX cards are AGP.

Direct X 8 games have been sold for about two years now, and most games released now uses Direct X 9. Splinter Cell, Unreal Tournament 2003 and Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness is three popular DX9 games. Theese uses DX9 features heavily. They can be switched off, with the result that games looks more like Half-Life 1998 than modern games. But it is true, that old games like Half-Life, or modern card with really downscaled graphics (like 1024x768, low-medium settings, no AA, no AS) can start and run the games without the DX8/9 features, where T&L comes to me as the one that have the greatest impact on the looks of a game (and thats a DX8 feature). I got much use for my GF3 in games like RTCW, Max Payne and Operation Flashpoint. All supporting and using stuff for Direct X 8.

This does not mean, however, that MX cards where ever launched as a 'Gamer' card. When the GF4MX card was released, GF4 Ti4200 was launched as the 'budget gamer card' while GF4MX was... well... a 'generic' graphiccard, for offices and homes.
Today, MX is replaced by FX 5200, that is probably their first 'mainstream' card that they actually consider useful for budget gaming.

MX cards costs about $30-$50 here, while the cheaper game-cards costs about $100 and up. They are the cheapest cards around, and they also have a nice color depth, and some 3d performance, so they are a very valuable office card.

So why did people grab them for gaming?
Well, confusion with the name "GeForce" is my greatest guess.

[Exophase]

Originally Posted by JemyM

5000 mark means that you use 3dMark 2001, not 3d Mark 2003.
3dMark 2001 is outdated. I get past 21000 points in 3dMark 2001. I got 9500 with my old GeForce 3 Ti500.

MX 4 440 get between 200-250 3dmark in 3dMark 2003.
I get past 8000.

And as we all know 3DMark 2003 is *highly* representative of real world game performance right now.

It seems to me like you think any card that isn't mid-range or better is worthless. Sorry, Ti4200 was never a budget card, it was a low mid-range card. I've never seen MX as being marketted as an office card, but nVidia was probably just pushing it because it was their cheapest range of cards. GF4 MX 420 I can see being used in offices, perhaps, since it has SDR memory, but GF4 MX 460 usually beats Radeon 9000 in non-DX8 tests. I suppose Radeon 9000 was an office card too, right?

This is what nVidia's site says about GF4 MX:

"With the GeForce4 MX graphics processing units (GPUs), NVIDIA provides a new level of cost-effective, high-performance graphics to the mainstream PC user."

Yep, mainstream PC user.. sounds like offices to me.

Of course we all have to realize that the cards are outdated now since the FX series debuted, but I'm looking at them from the perspective of when they were new. I imagine you think GFFX 5200 is an office card, though.

Maybe you just don't really realize what calling something an "office card" suggests.

- Exo

[JemyM]

shadow_tj
A gamer can probably afford the cheap alternative suited for gamers. There have always been a such alternative for thoose that does not wish to grab the 'upper range'. As I mentioned, GF4 Ti4200 was the 'budget option' for gamers, released next to MX and the other GF4 products.
GF4 Ti4200 did not only have full support for all current DX8 features, it also had a non-cropped memory. When it was released it costed ca $150 if I recall it right (while the 4600 was up to $3-400 somewhere).

[Clements]

High end cards give little benefits in emulation at the moment, so if thats all you do, there is little point investing in a better card as you won't see many benefits. Afterall, the PSX or N64 emulators don't fully (if at all) utilise Pixel Shaders 2.0+ or environmental bump-mapping or any other feature that MX's don't fully support in hardware. N64 emulation is practically independant of video cards as long as you have an MX or up, its the processor that determines the framerate in this situation.

If you enjoy these graphical features/effects and want high framerates in 3D PC games then buy a high-end card and some recent PC games and be happy. Or buy a console.

[JemyM]

Exophase

I am aware of the 3dMark issue, but that only applies when you test NVidia against ATI.

My personal experience with MX (we had one on my girlfriends machine until she inherited my GF3) is that its a decent 2d card, that comes very cheap, and it also have limited 3d support. We bought it to my girlfriends computer, as it was the cheapest graphiccard available at that time, which was also true while we bought all our office machines.

But it wasnt capable to run Kyodai (http://www.kyodai.com). It could run Quake 3, if you tuned down the resolution and quality alot, even Neverwinter Nights (that looks truly bad, but at least, it runs). When tested, I got 230 3dMark3 on my office machine (2ghz, GF4MX).

MX cards are the cards that often is released with TwinView (2 monitors), to compete with the Matrox lines, something that you wont see on the gaming line. The original statement on the website was that it was excellent for office applications and internet use. This have been changed when MX was announced for macintosh.

[hushypushy]

holy crap, i went to school and when i came back i see this. look where this stupid conversation is going.

for one:

Originally Posted by kenmasters1983

hushy pushy i get those framerates with fps limit on with it off i get

200 fps with it off....

dude. you are a douche. obviously if i put my frame limiter to 352, im going to be limiting it there. i only get 59.9 in limited mode because i have it limited to 60.

and second, the main point of this whole argument was settled by Lord Kane many posts ago:

They are not gaming cards by any stretch f the imagination. They are budget cards. Cheap. Something you use when you are too poor to afford a real card.

[DC_daNMan]

exactly. MX cards are **** (for anything other than 2D stuff). end. thats it. they are good for office PC's/servers.

[Mad]

To change a little: Whats better a GF4 Ti4200 64Nb or a GF 5600 FX??
I dont remember how many mem the FX have.
They´re almost same price here.

[hushypushy]

i would say FX5600. my friend and i bought nearly identical computers, and my 5600 does much better than the ti4200.

however i would suggest NOT getting the 256 mb 5600 if you are going to get one