Gotta be PCI.
Currently running a P3 866, 512Mb 133Mhz, TNT2 M64.
Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get? How are the Kyro cards - there's a
64Mb PCI version.
Is it even worth it for an 866 processor?
Cheers,
Mark
Reading, UK
why no AGP Slot?
"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (14 lines)
> Gotta be PCI. > > Currently running a P3 866, 512Mb 133Mhz, TNT2 M64. > > Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get? How are the Kyro cards - there's a > 64Mb PCI version. > > Is it even worth it for an 866 processor? > > Cheers, > > Mark > > Reading, UK"M. Main" <[email hidden]> writes:
> why no AGP Slot?
>
Because it might be a crap computer with integrated AGP for a below
average ATI onboard chip ?
--
Olav Malmin
remove .spam when replying
Quoted text (19 lines)
> > "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Gotta be PCI. > > > > Currently running a P3 866, 512Mb 133Mhz, TNT2 M64. > > > > Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get? How are the Kyro cards - there's a > > 64Mb PCI version. > > > > Is it even worth it for an 866 processor? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mark > > > > Reading, UK > >my apologies for not knowing everything, im american, forgive me.
"Olav Malmin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (31 lines)
> "M. Main" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > why no AGP Slot? > > > > Because it might be a crap computer with integrated AGP for a below > average ATI onboard chip ? > > > > > "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Gotta be PCI. > > > > > > Currently running a P3 866, 512Mb 133Mhz, TNT2 M64. > > > > > > Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get? How are the Kyro cards - there's a > > > 64Mb PCI version. > > > > > > Is it even worth it for an 866 processor? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > Reading, UK > > > > > > -- > Olav Malmin > remove .spam when replyingIn article <3cd12832$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (M. Main)
wrote:
> my apologies for not knowing everything, im american, forgive me.
Oh come on! That's the *least* American thing I've ever seen anyone type.
You're an imposter... or a recent import ;o)
Andrew McP
In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] (Mark) wrote:
> Gotta be PCI.
> Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get?
The only thing I know about GF cards is that if you see "MX" you should
generally run away :o) Oh, and the other thing I know is you get to
install fresh drivers every other day <ducks behind his Shield of Freedy
Effex and waves trusty Sword of Ef'Sayay in general direction of heathen
iNvidels!>
Try looking for a PCI Voodoo5 on ebay.co.uk, if you can get a good price
(I'd say 50 quid tops) it's worth having IMO. N2002 has a few graphics
glitches on the V5 but nothing to cry about, and the frame rate's fine
(not stunning, but perfectly drivable) with x2fsaa enabled.
I won't run anything and I mean *anything* without x2fsaa enabled. Makes
me shudder when I turn it off... all I can see if little steps everywhere
(which wouldn't be so bad if all the little steps looked like Fay).
Of course there's no doubt something just round the corner which will fail
to work on a V5 at all. But so far it's working fine with everything I've
thrown at it, and all us old die-hards seem to be missing out on is a few
fps and pixel shading & stuff... whatever that is :o)
Oh, hang on... you'd need to check if you have room for a V5 in that box
of yours, it's longer than average... but we don't like to brag ;o)
Andrew McP
The MX 400s are not to bad, and much better than regular MX. I have an MX
400 in my third box, but it was in the game box at one point. For NR2002
using OpenGL on the MX should be better than a v5 running d3d. Now if the v5
can run OpenGL it might be different, but last I knew it wasn't working very
well.
MadDAWG
I agree, a GF2 MX400 or the newer GF4 MX420 both come in PCI versions, and would be a decent match
for your machine.
--
Biz
"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
the....." - Ash
MadDAWG <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
> The MX 400s are not to bad, and much better than regular MX. I have an MX
> 400 in my third box, but it was in the game box at one point. For NR2002
> using OpenGL on the MX should be better than a v5 running d3d. Now if the v5
> can run OpenGL it might be different, but last I knew it wasn't working very
> well.
>
> MadDAWG
>
>
If a GF4 MX comes in PCI I'd go for that. Most benchmarks have the GF4 MX
cards running about the same as a GF2 GTS which is better than a GF2 MX.
MadDAWG
lol :)
nah, im just me, just cant stand assholes who act like that....but whatever.
lol
"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (9 lines)
> In article <3cd12832$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (M. Main) > wrote: > > > my apologies for not knowing everything, im american, forgive me. > > Oh come on! That's the *least* American thing I've ever seen anyone type. > You're an imposter... or a recent import ;o) > > Andrew McPAndrew MacPherson ([email hidden]) wrote on 02
May 2002:
> The only thing I know about GF cards is that if you see "MX" you
> should generally run away :o)<snip>
We-ell... 'tall depends. I've got a GF2 MX400 64 megs, and it's fine on
everything, N2002 and IL 2-Sturmovik demos included.[1] I think the
problem comes when you either: a) have an MX200 32 megs, or b) get a
GF4 MX and expect it to blow a topline GF3 away. Which it doesn't.
[1] The Ultima IX Ascension demo off my old PC Gamer CD is still a
virtual slideshow, but that game was so bugged at that stage it's not
surprising.
--
"After all, a mere thousand yards... such a harmless little knoll,
really" - Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh.
The GPL Scrapyard: Back again! http://www.btinternet.com/~gplscrapyard
Try to find a voodoo5 5500 on e-bay or somewhere.
"Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (14 lines)
> Gotta be PCI. > > Currently running a P3 866, 512Mb 133Mhz, TNT2 M64. > > Is GF2 MX400 the best I'll get? How are the Kyro cards - there's a > 64Mb PCI version. > > Is it even worth it for an 866 processor? > > Cheers, > > Mark > > Reading, UK[email hidden] (David Buttery) wrote:
> We-ell... 'tall depends.
It was a rather sweeping generalisation, I know :o) It's just that IME
"MX" stands for Marketing eXercise, the GF4 MX being a case in point,
implying it's a GF4 when it's not really.
Having said that I *am* considering one for my old PC which currently
struggles with a 16Mb TNT2 in it. GF4 mx's seem to start at about �80,
which is a pretty good price really. It's just that I object to buying
another nVidia card because their product line these days seems designed
*specifically* to confuse the hell out of anyone trying to work out where
the best bang for buck lies.
Mmm... so maybe I should take my own advice and go look for another
cheap V5 :o)
Andrew McP
Thx all,
It's gotta ba PCI because it -is- a crap computer - a Compaq with
space saver desktop, on-board ATI gfx and very little space for pci
cards - but it cost me nothing as it's supplied by work. And it's a
hell of a lot better than struggling along with my own PIII450 / V3
combo. I can actually race in N2K2 now...
V5 will probably be out of the question due to space issues.
How big is a GF2 MX?
Cheers,
Mark
Reading, UK
Andrew MacPherson wrote:
>
> Mmm... so maybe I should take my own advice and go look for another
> cheap V5 :o)
Let me know when you decide, I have a couple that is up for retirement,
I actually have 3 but I'm keeping one for myself....nostalgia :-)
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Goy Larsen) wrote:
> Let me know when you decide
Hehe, too late. I spent a few hours wandering around the web and Google
trying to make sense of the nVidia range this morning. It's insane! Then I
thought, "oh, sod it" and went to find a GF4 mx440, working on the
principle that at least then I'd have a box that would be able to show me
what I'm missing (?) with all the fancy features GFs do these days.
However I spotted that for another 16 euros (that's a ten quid in real
money ;o) I could have a GF3 Ti200 which seems to benchmark better than
the GF4 mx with fsaa turned on.
Must confess I got dizzy again finding and viewing comparative reviews.
(There must be a name for this kind of "web-based hardware research
overload"!) So I just hit "buy it" and got that immediate sense of relief
you get... thank gawd I don't have to think about that decision any more!
:o)
Andrew McP
