GF4 Ti 4200 Enough?

[Bilko]

I have:

AMD XP 2100
MSI Geforce 4 Ti 4200 (128mb)
512MB DDR RAM
8RDA+ Epox Nforce 2 mobo
Windows XP

I am worried that my card won't run Half-Life 2 well and I really don't want to spend a load of cash on a new 9800 (Although I have been thinking about it for several weeks, tearing myself to bits). I think I might buy some more cooling for my 2100 and try to overclock it, what do you think? Any advice?

 

[Axyon]

That's enough to run on full details, or so Gabe claims.

 

[dawdler]

Without any fancy DX9 features of course, but yeah, the 4200 is fast enough.

 

[TrueWeltall]

Dont worry about any new parts until you get the game and then decide what you need/want to get.

 

[ferd]

Originally posted by dawdler
Without any fancy DX9 features of course, but yeah, the 4200 is fast enough.

ppl please dont say that stuff...that card was like build for DX9

 

[Murrie]

the Ti4200, Ti4400, and the Ti4600 are DX8 based cards, you wont get all the features but it should run the game just fine with them.

The FX line is where nvidia started making DX9 compliant hardware.

ATI's DX9 cards started with the 9500 if i remember correctly

 

[Lifthz]

Yes, it's more than enough to run Half-Life 2 in high detail. However some of the effects won't be present since some of the effects are exclusive to DX9 cards.

Originally posted by ferd
ppl please dont say that stuff...that card was like build for DX9

Geforce 4's are not DX9 cards.

BY the way, Valve told me there is a lot more DX9 than what was in the E3 build...

 

[XtAkm4p]

sniff, i have the 64 meg version of the 4200 :'(

 

[vissione]

Originally posted by XtAkm4p
sniff, i have the 64 meg version of the 4200 :'(

I've got the same one, and you won't hurt too much if you're sticking to 1024x768 like me. The high-end cards use their buttload of 128MB when at super high resolutions, but at resonable resolutions like 800x600 or 1024x768 you don't need that much VRAM.

I'm going to upgrade to a DirectX9 card down the road(especially when mods are out), and it will definately have 128MB of VRAM, but for the time being I'm pretty sure a 64MB Geforce 4 Ti 4200 is enough to run HL2 really well. Hopefully if it's an 8x AGP version the extra bandwidth can compensate, as well as the RAM in your system. :cheers:

 

[Murrie]

most of the 64mb 4200 cards are actually faster than the 128mb when running in the lower resolutions (1024-768 is the sweet spot i feel)
The memory clock speed is generally much faster on the 4200 64mb which for the most part makes up for the lower amount of on board ram.

see toms (or any other review of the 4200 128 vs 64 mb cards)
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030120/vgacharts-02.html

The 128mb does manage to lead the 64 in some situations, but almost across the board the 64mb version is faster.

I wouldnt worry one bit about "only" having the 64mb version of the ti4200..

I am very happy with my 4200 but i will probably be upgrading once i have HL2 in hand since its the first real reason to get a DX9 card...

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Murrie
most of the 64mb 4200 cards are actually faster than the 128mb when running in the lower resolutions (1024-768 is the sweet spot i feel)
The memory clock speed is generally much faster on the 4200 64mb which for the most part makes up for the lower amount of on board ram.

see toms (or any other review of the 4200 128 vs 64 mb cards)
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030120/vgacharts-02.html

The 128mb does manage to lead the 64 in some situations, but almost across the board the 64mb version is faster.

I wouldnt worry one bit about "only" having the 64mb version of the ti4200..

I am very happy with my 4200 but i will probably be upgrading once i have HL2 in hand since its the first real reason to get a DX9 card...

true, they are faster when fill rates aren't as high, but in the long run, the 128mb versions are more future-proof, and can usually be overclocked significantly anyway, so that makes up for the $20 higher price tag for twice the ram; for example, ut2k3 takes advantage of 100mb+ of vram at high resolutions; just imagine HL2, most likely much higher



I'm going to upgrade to a DirectX9 card down the road(especially when mods are out), and it will definately have 128MB of VRAM, but for the time being I'm pretty sure a 64MB Geforce 4 Ti 4200 is enough to run HL2 really well. Hopefully if it's an 8x AGP version the extra bandwidth
firstly, I would seriously look for a 256mb DX9 part, since they are going to last you longer, even if a budget version may be clocked lower than a 128mb one; but just to note: don't choose a 9600 256mb non-pro over a 9600 128mb pro, since the 9500 kicks both its arses; I'd rather wait 'til HL2 is out and benchmarks are in to see how the bill is going to fit

secondly, 8x makes shit for difference on a DX8 card; this is simple marketing tactics, like the ti4800/9200; you can bump down the agp bus to 2x and you'll hardly drop in performance, depending on rez/aa levels of course... but don't tell me it needs the bandwidth

 

[Murrie]

there is no "future proof" in video cards... a video cards life is 6months to a year. At which point the high end cards with 128mbs of ram will either still be enough or youd want a new card 256 anywhichway..
in 3 months that will probably change and 256 will be the norm for most cards being released or planned...

though i do agree with you for the most part. Thats exactly why i got the 128mb

 

[PSX]

Originally posted by Murrie
there is no "future proof" in video cards... a video cards life is 6months to a year. At which point the high end cards with 128mbs of ram will either still be enough or youd want a new card 256 anywhichway..
in 3 months that will probably change and 256 will be the norm for most cards being released or planned...

though i do agree with you for the most part. Thats exactly why i got the 128mb

well... put it this way: right now both 128mb and 256mb versions of cards are being made; which ones are more likely to be the most future-proof? the 256mb part of course... both cards can be the same generation and generally have the same lifetime because of this, but more ram=can take advantage of hungry games; as far as "6 months to a year..." that depends on the market, whether or not people will still be buying them, but don't tell me a card that is 18 months old is automatically outdated... it can still run the latest games at 50fps+ for the most part.. take the GF2 GTS.. came out around May 2000? it was still sufficient a year and a half later.. how about the 9700? it still kicks arse like no card for its age

 

[PSX]

ok, how about this for good measure... how do you explain nVidia pumping out old-arse technology like the gf4mx lineup, based on the geforce 2s, or ATi still making low-end DX8 cards like the 9000/9100/9200 ??
look at this pathetic marketing...

Name Performance
8500 9200SE
9000 9000
9000 Pro 9000 Pro
9100 9200
9200 SE 9200 Pro
9200 9100
9200 Pro 8500
9500 9600
9500 Pro (v1 & v2) 9600 Pro
9600 9500
9600 Pro 9500 Pro (v1 & v2)
9700 TX 9700 TX
9700 9700
9700 Pro 9800 SE
9800 SE 9700 Pro
9800 (128MB) 9800 (128MB)
9800 Pro (128MB) 9800 Pro (128)
9800 Pro (256MB) 9800 Pro (256)
9800 SE, etc.

Name Performance
4200_____5200
4400_____5200U
4600_____5600
4800SE___4200
4800_____4400
5200_____4800SE
5200U____5600U
5600_____4600
5600U____4800
5800_____5800
5800U____5800U
5900_____5900
5900U____5900U

Geforce 256
Geforce 256DDR
Geforce 2 MX
Geforce 2 MX-200
Geforce 2 MX-400
Geforce 2 GTS
Geforce 2 Pro
Geforce 2 Ultra
Geforce 2 Ti
Geforce 3 Ti200
Geforce 3 Ti500
Geforce 3
Geforce 4 MX-420
Geforce 4 MX 440 SE
Geforce 4 MX-440
Geforce 4 MX-440-8X
Geforce 4 MX-460

enough for any buyer almost to have their head in a spin; it's ridiculous how they over-extend a card's already-outdated lifetime by slapping on a bigger name like the 9800 SE which gets beat by a 9700; now whose fault is it for underpowered cards, budget or not...