nvidia cards

[ironman666 0]

hi everyone. i currently have a voodoo3 3000 and i want to upgrade to a nvidia card. because i don't have much to spend on cards right now i'm thinking about getting a geforce2 MX.

 

i'll be honest, i'm not much of a gamer. i'll play games here and there (i play Unreal Tournament and Madden 2000/2002 a lot). but other than those two games i don't play much (for example, i recently beat max payne. since there is no multiplayer mode that i know of i won't touch that game again).

 

knowing this much, is the geforce2 mx series worth the money? from what i've read at various websites that review vidcards it is a good card considering its price. i also want to know if getting a 32meg card over a 64meg card is worth it. personally i'd like to get a 64meg card but considering the fact that i don't play too many games, will i really notice the 32meg difference? and of course i'm also concerned with support in windowsxp.

 

any advice will be greatly appreciated. thanks

[Brian Frank 0]

I would make sure to avoid any card based on a GF2 MX-200. I honestly can't tell the difference between it and my Voodoo 3 3000 AGP. Go with a GF2 MX or MX-400. The MX-400 is just a regular MX with a higher core clock speed and double the ram, which doesn't seem to do jack for performance.

A solid GF2MX is the Hercules 3D Prophet II MX.

 

Depending on how much you wanna spend, you could also look at a GF2 Pro (I'm not kidding). The last time I looked at Newegg.com, the MSI GF2 Pro card was $135USD+S&H=~$150. If you want some cushion for the future, I'd highly consider it. MX's are cheap, but the Pro's are one step below a GF2 Ultra/GF3 level, not to mention less than half the price.

 

It really depends on how much you want to spend. Cards based on Nvidia's chips are the only one's I'm confident will work well in XP.

ATI's drivers and support have left me unimpressed, and the KyroII cards don't have a real history behind them--although I'd go with them long before I touch ATI's stuff again.

 

Just keep away from the MX-200's and you'll have a better performance boost in your rig.

[Deviant 0]

Yeah,

GeForce2 MX400 is a good solution if you are not heavy gamer.

nVidia has very good support for all M$ operating systems.

And what about 32 - 64 MB comparison ?

There is very small performance increase due to 64MB,but

there is almost no price difference between 32 & 64 too so go with 64MB.

 

 

Regards

D.

[FatFish 0]

ah.. i forget where i have seen this news, i could be wrong.

 

GeForce3 T200 is supposed be the MX version of GeForce3... and it should be out on 7th or 17th (i could only remember there is a 7) with T400 (Pro version) and Det. 4 ..

 

even if you don't want GeForce3 Txxx.. wait until its out, then it will have a price cut on GF2 series.. then you can buy the GF2 instead of GF2 MX..

[JP- 0]

If you want a gf2 now i would get the pro version, i love it!

 

Geforce 2 Pro, very nice, and good price as well 8)

[DQD 0]

Yeppers! The GF2 MX 400 is not the screamer you'd think!

 

I bought one by PNY and installed it on my SE-440bx2 Intel board using winME and XP Home. Using the 8.05 drivers, I was able to muster 68 FPS in Q3 which was no better than my V3/3000!

 

So noting that the MB I had didn't support agp 2x, I opted for an Abit that supports AGP 4x. Of course I had to register XP again but that's another story. Anyhow under winMe, my FPS was boosted to 75 FPS but still 68 on XP! Ok so I read a little more and installed the Via 4in1 drivers and WHAMMO! On WinME I got 150 FPS! WoOT!!!!! I tried the VIA 4in1 on Xp and it couldn't find the correct INF file so I'm still at 68 FPS on XP!

 

I'm still looking for an XP 4in1 install. Anyone know of one that works on XP? Should it work on XP?

 

DQD

[FatFish 0]

The VIA chipset drivers are included in winxp, so the 4-in-1 is not needed.

 

I don't play FPS often, but is there really difference between 68fps and 150fps? i mean the number is different of course, but can you tell the difference when you are in the game?

[AndyFair 0]

Quote:

Using the 8.05 drivers, I was able to muster 68 FPS in Q3 which was no better than my V3/3000!

The drivers supplied with WinXP suck big time. The latest Detonators (14.x) will give you the speed boost you need.

Rgds
AndyF

[Nogib 0]

Quote:

...Using the 8.05 drivers...

!!! Why did you do that?!?!?! No wonder you are getting such poor performance. The drivers built into XP for nVidia cards aren't perfect (it has the 12.40's in it) but why would you go to a version that is great for TNT2 owners and poor for GeForce cards like the 8.05's?

I don't know how how good or bad the included 12.40 drivers in XP are since I went straight to 14.70 after installing XP, but the GF2MX actually is a great gaming card for resolutions 1024x768 and under. Above that you'd need a GeForce3 to get good performance.

Get the 14.xx drivers, NOW!

[Amon^Ra 0]

did anyone else pick up on him installing via 4 in 1's on an intel board?.......

 

my bad didnt read the abit bit propperly.

 

yer mate, those drivers are beyond old.

put some newer ones on ie 12.90's or 14 somethings

[DQD 0]

Hey, I downloaded the 8.05s (12.42.805)Mid August recommended by eddie from a thread in the Gamers XP forum. They were the unofficial leaked ones so I believed they were the latest and last month probably were.

 

Don't fret though, I saw that the 14.70s were out and I intend to install them this weekend!

 

sheesh you guys act like you are the only ones who know what's up!

 

[DQD 0]

Quote:

The VIA chipset drivers are included in winxp, so the 4-in-1 is not needed.

I don't play FPS often, but is there really difference between 68fps and 150fps? i mean the number is different of course, but can you tell the difference when you are in the game?

I'm not so sure about how the graphics look but I can tell by the number of hits that land! While booted to XP using the same Q3 install/config but only getting 68 FPS, I play 9 hardcore bots and win usually but not all times. (i'm no expert player so hold the comments) On the WinME boot where I get much higher FPS using the same install/config of Q3, I usually double highest bot's score and I win big time, every time!

Also the physics are different. Where I may struggle to jump a canyon or ledge on the XP at 68FPS, I don't even have to think about it on WinME at even 100FPS. So to me atleast, it does make a big difference.

[Amon^Ra 0]

Well believe it or not.

my suggestion is this

maybe look at ur quake 3 config.

 

u say u get 68 fps

and 100 in winme

 

well my pc isnt anything major

and i get 125 and it never drops.

but i play with 640 480 low textures, etc and for Quake 3 u will find this is alot easier (also gun textures turned off), most of the awesome q3 players i have seen do this. (maybe its an australian thing i dunno, as im not big on it)

[DQD 0]

Nope! Nothing wrong with the config... Its the exact same one and its how I like it.

 

I have my winme on the first partition and the XP on the second. Both use the Q3 install on the first partition.

 

 

Anyhow... I downloaded the 14.70 drivers and as you guys suggested, it boosted my FPS on XP side to 100 FPS on demo Four.

 

All is well!

[Draftsman 0]

I have a GeForce 256 card, why can't I run 1024X768 in Open GL?

Or even 800X600? I've got the latest NVidia drivers.

 

What's teh scoop, my card don't run in anything but D3D in halflife or what????

 

Anyone?

[DQD 0]

Quote:

The VIA chipset drivers are included in winxp, so the 4-in-1 is not needed.

VIA just released 4.33 4in1 that fixed the XP install problem so now you can update 4in1 on XP.

http://www.viahardware.com/download/index.shtm

[Lythium 0]

Their installer doesn't do jack.. Check all the file versions after you run it.. Everything is the same. In fact, if you go look at what it contains, you'll see that the only xp files are a few .inf's. The ide drivers in that release completely trash your hd speed. Do not install them.