GeForce 3 Ti-500 or GeForce 4 MX 460?

[Gaunt]

Just curious as to which card would be a better choice. They are about the same price, but I'm not sure how they compair feature wise. I've checked Anand's GPU shootout, and the TI-500 looks to be the better choice.

Can anyone lend any insight?

Thanks

 

[Rand]

Ti500, faster and much better feature set. No point in goint in depth, as the Ti500 is clearly a far better option.

The only area wherein the GF4 MX would be preferable is DVD playback.

 

[Gaunt]

Great, that's what I wanted to hear.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Check the prices for Radeon8500 & 8500LE as well as the far superior GF4TI4200 cards. For most folk the choices come down to budget and location. US$ at $100 the Radeon8500LE is the best choice, with the GF3TI200 close behind. At $150 the GF4TI4200 sports faster operation, enhanced AA, VIVO, '2D' image quality and is an excellent o/c (GF4TI4400 levels). The 4200 is available in 2 key flavours, ask for more info if you're interested. If you can get a good deal 2nd hand on a GF3TI500 then go for it, but the GF4TI4200 is often cheaper and is better in EVERY way.

If you have to choose between GF3TI500 and GF4MX460 the GF3 is faster, heck the GF3TI200 is a lot faster than the GF4MX460, even before o/c comes in to effect! Not only that but the GF4MX series are simply a slightly enhanced GF2s with better DVD playback, '2D' image quality and better AA, they therefore lack hw support for DX8 present in all GF3, GF4TI, Radeon8500, SiS Xabre and Matrox Parhelia cards.

 

[AnAndAustin]

TomsHW VGA Chart showing how all gens of gfx cards compare (XP2000+)

AnAnd gfx cards with CPU Scaling (shows how CPU speed effects gfx perf)

AnAnd GF4TI4200 review

ExHW 4200 review & comparison to GF4TI4400/4600

GotApex lots of gfx cards inc AA & Aniso perf

TomsHW GF4TI4400/4600 roundup but also shows GF3 & GF4TI4200

AnAnd lots of gfx cards and how they perf on the next gen games

 

[Gaunt]

Wow, alot of info there.

Basically, I'm looking at paying under $200 CDN. The GF4TI4200 is about $280 CDN, while the GF3 TI-500 is about $180. I'm checking prices only at a couple of local stores, and not using pricewatch or anything. This card will actually be a gift for someone else, and actually from someone else... I just get to be the middle man because I happen to know a little bit more than they do, unfortunately I haven't been paying attention to video cards since I bought my GF3 almost a year ago for about $580 CDN...

Thanks for all the info. I'll give it a little bit more thought.

 

[stevens]

the ti4600 is gonna be faster that the gf3ti500 but you should also look at the radeon8500 series

 

[DKNG]

You could get a Radeon 8500 LE 64MB OEM for $150 or the 8500 LE 128MB Retail for $200 from ncix.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Check and see what the prices are like. In terms of gfx cards pure perf they stack up like this (slowest to fastest):

GF2 series (NO DX8 hw support)
GF4MX series (GF2 with slightly better AA, image quality & VIVO. NO DX8 hw support)
GF3TI200 (o/c to within 10% of GF3TI500)
GF3 (original GF3, unlikely to find now)
GF3TI500 (great card but prices generally still too high, not a good o/c)
GF4TI4200 (great card, within 10% of GF4TI4400 and o/c to GF4TI4400 speeds too)
GF4TI4400 (stuck in the middle, 4200 better for money conscious, 4600 better if you can spare the cash)
GF4TI4600 (undisputedly the fastest card, at the moment)

Non-nVidia alternatives are, in perf order:

SiS Xabre400 (GF2TI/GF4MX440 perf. Has some DX8 hw support.)
Radeon7500 (GF2TI/GF4MX440 perf. Still no DX8 hw support.)
Radeon8500LE (GF3 perf. Great value in US & Canada, like GF3 & GF4 has DX8 hw support.)
Matrox Parhelia512 (GF3 perf. Like GF3 & GF4 has DX8 hw support. VERY expensive.)
Radeon8500 (GF3TI500 perf. Only about 10% faster than Rad8500LE and usually a lot more pricey.)

In terms of AA: GF2 and Radeon cards take a big perf hit. GF3, GF4 and Xabre all take small perf hits when using AA. Par512 takes only a small hit when able to use its Fragment AA, but its only other option is 4xAA and it takes a big hit, bear in mind you only get GF3 perf from it in the first place. Another advantage of the Par512 is its ability to run 3 monitors simultaneously, but it will certainly be way outside you price range.

In terms of '2D' image quality, GF2 are poor while GF3 are better, GF4, Radeon and Par512 all are exceptionaly good. At your budget the best cards are likely to be GF3TI200 or Rad8500LE, the GF3TI500 and Rad8500 are usually far too expensive for the small perf advantage they have over these 2 cards. If the prices are about equal the Rad8500LE is slightly faster and has better '2D' image quality and VIVO. The GF3TI200 has better AA perf. If it is a gift the GF3 'brand' will probably be appreciated. You should find much lower prices on the net, many people say fantastic things about www.newegg.com - certainly worth a look. It may be worth considering buying from the US if the prices are lower depending how it works out with taxes, shipping and the exchange rate. The GF4TI4200 is definitely the best card (particularly status/gift wise) but if it's outside the budget any GF3 or Rad8500 card are still great buys.

 

[Gaunt]

Taxes, shipping, exchange rates, and don't forget the duty at the border if the site ships from the US.... Not good at all. This is why I stick to local stores. I also need the card immediately, since I was only given 4 days notice.

As far as price goes, the GF4 non-mx cards are a big jump over the gf3 ti500. I haven't really looked at the radeon cards, but I've been wary of ATI for a while now. I used to buy ATI cards all the time, but they always seemed to be plagued by bad drivers and never really had the features of other cards. I'll have a quick look at the 8500LE before deciding on the ti500 though, just to be sure. I'm pretty sure the recipient of the gift isn't going to mind ti500, and it's right in the price range I've got to work with.

 

[rApiDShoT]

Consider the Geforce 3 Ti200, you can pretty much overclock it to a Ti500 and save money at the same time.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Precisely rApiDShoT, the GF3TI200 will o/c easily to within 10% of the GF3TI500 and is often nearly half the price. The Radeon8500LE will reach Radeon8500 levels too. ATI are MUCH better with compatability and drivers, I doubt a Rad will cause any more probs than any GF card. Do shop around, particularly for GF4TI4200 cards, prices can vary by up to 50%! See how the prices are like for you localy, you may be better off buying some extra RAM and a GF3TI200/Rad8500LE.

 

[Gaunt]

You guys are pretty adamant about those ti-4200 and rad 8500LE cards I see.

As I noted before, this is actually a gift... for my brother. I'm not being too picky about what video card it is cause I know he's not going to bother overclocking it. He's just going to play CS for countless hours.

Thanks for all the help and suggestions though. I needed a good reason to catch up on my video card info.

 

[AnAndAustin]

In the cases of the 4200 and 8500LE o/c'ing isn't really o/c'ing. These 2 cards, along with GF3TI200, are clocked far below their true potential to promote sales of the more expensive cards. If you don't want hassle a GF4TI4200 should easily reach 275/520 as a very safe and stable level considering the average is 300/550 - 300/600. In any case these are all great cards and pack a bag of perf, your bro will be happy with any of the cards mentioned. I would still advise GF3TI200 or Rad8500LE and spend the excess cash on another stick of RAM or nice soundcard or something. Just my £0.01!

 

[Gaunt]

Looking a little harder at the 8500LE... any major difference between actual ATI and an OEM/other brand name 8500LE?

 

[Athlon4all]

Originally posted by: Gaunt
Looking a little harder at the 8500LE... any major difference between actual ATI and an OEM/other brand name 8500LE?

Well this is up for debate on whether the 2D quality is worse on OEM Radeon's, and also some of them will have core/mem clocks slower than a ATI 8500LE (hence the lower cost). You reallyu have to look at the cards themselves to figure out the core/mem clocks and as for the 2D IQ well, you would have to look at reviews of that card.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: Athlon4all

Originally posted by: Gaunt
Looking a little harder at the 8500LE... any major difference between actual ATI and an OEM/other brand name 8500LE?

Well this is up for debate on whether the 2D quality is worse on OEM Radeon's, and also some of them will have core/mem clocks slower than a ATI 8500LE (hence the lower cost). You reallyu have to look at the cards themselves to figure out the core/mem clocks and as for the 2D IQ well, you would have to look at reviews of that card.

Most third party vendors are having their boards manufactured by ATi still, so 2D image quality should be near identical.
Clockspeeds are generally 250/250, but a few vendors sell 230/230 clocked boards, and others are available clocked up to 290/290.

 

[AnAndAustin]

That's the trend I've seen too Rand. If it's not ATI branded then it almost certainly uses lower clocks and cheaper RAM. The cheaper RAM will severely inhibit o/c'ing. I wouldn't expect much difference in '2D' image quality just like Rand states. So it will really come down to the costs of the non-ATI cards, and also the oem vs retail, where again the oem versions may come with lower clocks if not cheaper RAM again. However, any Rad8500LE will easily kick the a$$ of a GF2, GF4MX or Rad7500 and is well worth an extra $30. If possible get a 128MB card as 64MB will become more limiting over the next 6-12 months, not of much concern to anyone who already has a fast 64MB card, but it would be worth spending a little extra when buying a new card, budget permitting.

If you can find info on what clocks the RadeonLE cards use, the standard ATI ones are 250/500 128Bit DDR (250/250 if quoting without DDR). IIRC If the cards use 5.0ns RAM they will probably be clocked at 230/460 and o/c to 250/500, if they use 4.0ns they should use 250/500 and o/c to 275/550. You can usually read the RAM's ns rating off the RAM chips, 2nd line last 2 numbers.