OT: GF3 Ti 500 to GF4 Ti 4400 Upgrade Install Question

I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certified drivers and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go (meaning the OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will manually install the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a dreaded OS re-install? I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for an entire year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. -- Joe M.

You won't need to reinstall XP, but you should install newer drivers anyway. The 40.xx series helps out GF4's a lot. I think you'd really need to reinstall the 30.82's if you wanted to stick with them anyway...but I did a similar swap (GF3 Ti200 to GF4 Ti4200) and I installed the 40.52 drivers. I think there's a 40.7x out now that's supposedly a WHQL candidate - but I've had zero problems with the 40.52 or whatever it is. Milhouse "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP > system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certifieddrivers > and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go (meaning the > OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will manually install > the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a dreaded OS re-install? > > I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for anentire > year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. > > -- > Joe M. > >

Joe M. wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP > system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certified > drivers and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go > (meaning the OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will > manually install the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a > dreaded OS re-install? > > I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for an > entire > year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. > > -- > Joe M.

Uninstall the video drivers, because while the system will detect the new card, it won't understand that it can use the existing drivers. Then install your new card and reinstall the drivers. You should be good to go at that point.

Find detonator destroyer on the net to remove the drivers, then plug the card and install the same drivers again.. "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP > system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certifieddrivers > and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go (meaning the > OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will manually install > the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a dreaded OS re-install? > > I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for anentire > year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. > > -- > Joe M. > >

"Ivan Jozic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:apti5a$1ur$[email hidden]... > Find detonator destroyer on the net to remove the drivers, then plug the > card and install the same drivers again.. > I thought Detonator Destroyer was NOT for use on XP. That is unless they updated it since the last time I checked. MadDAWG

"MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > "Ivan Jozic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:apti5a$1ur$[email hidden]... > > Find detonator destroyer on the net to remove the drivers, then plug the > > card and install the same drivers again.. > > > > I thought Detonator Destroyer was NOT for use on XP. That is unless they > updated it since the last time I checked. > > MadDAWG >

I haven't seen a detonator destroyer that was XP compatible. Has anyone? -- Joe M.

> I haven't seen a detonator destroyer that was XP compatible. Has anyone? > > -- > Joe M. I have not had any problems and I have tried alot of drivers including the Omega ones. I just uninstall the ocurrent ones, and install the new ones. MadDAWg

You will have to reinstall the drivers. -Larry "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP > system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certifieddrivers > and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go (meaning the > OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will manually install > the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a dreaded OS re-install? > > I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for anentire > year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. > > -- > Joe M. > >

This is not really necessary unless there is a problem. Uninstall the drivers, shut down, swap cards start up, cancel the hardware detection wizard, and then install the drivers. One more restart and you're good to go. -Larry "Ivan Jozic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:apti5a$1ur$[email hidden]... > Find detonator destroyer on the net to remove the drivers, then plug the > card and install the same drivers again.. >

I don't think it has been. -Larry "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > "Ivan Jozic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:apti5a$1ur$[email hidden]... > > Find detonator destroyer on the net to remove the drivers, then plug the > > card and install the same drivers again.. > > > > I thought Detonator Destroyer was NOT for use on XP. That is unless they > updated it since the last time I checked. > > MadDAWG > >

Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalled old drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth sailing so far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. -- Joe M. "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I'm replacing my GF3 Ti 500 with a GF4 Ti 4400 on my AMD 1600+ Windows XP > system (ECS K7S5A Mobo/512MB RAM). I'm running the 30.82 certified drivers > and I am wondering if I can just swap cards and be good to go (meaning the > OS will apply the same drivers to the new card or I will manually install > the drivers for the new card) or do I need to do a dreaded OS re-install? > > I want to avoid re-installing XP since it has run wonderfully for an entire > year; if it ain't broke don't fix it. ;0) Any advice appreciated. > > -- > Joe M. > >

On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote: >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalled old >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth sailing so >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002.Hi, Glad to hear of your success. Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in nearly 2 year intervals. Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time the features aren't enabled because of side effects. Regards all, istoff

"istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalledold > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth sailingso

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > Hi, > > Glad to hear of your success. > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in > nearly 2 year intervals. > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. >

I don't think going from a GF3 Ti 500 to a GF4 Ti 4400 is a substantial upgrade given my AMD 1600+ cpu. I only did it because the card was free. If I were to buy a card it would be the ATI 9700 Pro. Although my cpu would still be the bottleneck, a cpu upgrade in a few months would really show the value of the ATI card (hi-resolution & hi-QUALITY FSAA). The best part about this upgrade is decent FSAA for "free" (no performance hit). I can now run IL2 at 1280x1024x32-bit 4xFSAA (S-mode, better than std. 4x) with little loss in performance. It's nice but not THAT nice if I had to buy the card (currently $200-230 US). -- Joe M.

I did the same upgrade some time back, and I thought it was worth it. It wasn't so much for a huge increase in fps (it was a good upgrade, but not mind-blowing), but a much, much improved _stability_ in frame rate. In other words, frame rates remained far more consistent in various conditions. Although I've just recently started using it, nView was also a major bonus. -Larry "istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalledold > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth sailingso

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > Hi, > > Glad to hear of your success. > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in > nearly 2 year intervals. > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. > > > Regards all, > istoff

Thus making it valuable for variable-fps sims like MS's CFS3, huh? "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0pVw9.80226$[email hidden]... > I did the same upgrade some time back, and I thought it was worth it. > > It wasn't so much for a huge increase in fps (it was a good upgrade, butnot > mind-blowing), but a much, much improved _stability_ in frame rate. In > other words, frame rates remained far more consistent in variousconditions. > > Although I've just recently started using it, nView was also a majorbonus.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > -Larry > > "istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalled > old > > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth

sailing

Quoted text (21 lines)

> so > > >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > > Hi, > > > > Glad to hear of your success. > > > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in > > nearly 2 year intervals. > > > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time > > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. > > > > > > Regards all, > > istoff > >

What do you mean by variable? If you are referring to consistency, my fps are pretty steady in CFS3. They only vary based on altitude (30's up high - 15-25 down low) which is unavoidable with so much terrain detail. -- Joe M. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:EG7y9.70534$[email hidden]... > Thus making it valuable for variable-fps sims like MS's CFS3, huh? > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:0pVw9.80226$[email hidden]... > > I did the same upgrade some time back, and I thought it was worth it. > > > > It wasn't so much for a huge increase in fps (it was a good upgrade, but > not > > mind-blowing), but a much, much improved _stability_ in frame rate. In > > other words, frame rates remained far more consistent in various > conditions. > > > > Although I've just recently started using it, nView was also a major > bonus. > > > > -Larry > > > > "istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). Uninstalled > > old > > > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth > sailing > > so > > > >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > > > Hi, > > > > > > Glad to hear of your success. > > > > > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > > > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > > > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in > > > nearly 2 year intervals. > > > > > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > > > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > > > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time > > > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. > > > > > > > > > Regards all, > > > istoff > > > > > >

Never played it. I just know how it's been in NR2002. -Larry "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:EG7y9.70534$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> Thus making it valuable for variable-fps sims like MS's CFS3, huh? > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:0pVw9.80226$[email hidden]... > > I did the same upgrade some time back, and I thought it was worth it. > > > > It wasn't so much for a huge increase in fps (it was a good upgrade, but > not > > mind-blowing), but a much, much improved _stability_ in frame rate. In > > other words, frame rates remained far more consistent in various > conditions. > > > > Although I've just recently started using it, nView was also a major > bonus. > > > > -Larry > > > > "istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood).

Uninstalled

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > old > > > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth > sailing > > so > > > >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > > > Hi, > > > > > > Glad to hear of your success. > > > > > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > > > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > > > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade in > > > nearly 2 year intervals. > > > > > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > > > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > > > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half the time > > > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. > > > > > > > > > Regards all, > > > istoff > > > > > >

Joe, It varies from a high of abt. 24 fps (I'm running a GF2 GTS on a 1.3 T'bird) to a low of abt. zero fps (the whole show just stutters to a halt for a second or so). I'm not ready to upgrade the CPU (saving my dimes & nickels, tho), but am planning to replace the vid with either a GF4-4400 or an ATI 9500 Pro. Any recommendations? P.S. No probs with CFS2, IL-2, FS2002, F/A-18, EAW, FU2, Falcon 4, etc., altho FS2000 is a little balky...particularly with the Hudson Project scenery add-on (VBG!). --Steve "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > What do you mean by variable? If you are referring to consistency, my fps > are pretty steady in CFS3. They only vary based on altitude (30's uphigh -

Quoted text (15 lines)

> 15-25 down low) which is unavoidable with so much terrain detail. > > -- > Joe M. > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:EG7y9.70534$[email hidden]... > > Thus making it valuable for variable-fps sims like MS's CFS3, huh? > > > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:0pVw9.80226$[email hidden]... > > > I did the same upgrade some time back, and I thought it was worth it. > > > > > > It wasn't so much for a huge increase in fps (it was a good upgrade,

but > > not > > > mind-blowing), but a much, much improved _stability_ in frame rate.In

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > other words, frame rates remained far more consistent in various > > conditions. > > > > > > Although I've just recently started using it, nView was also a major > > bonus. > > > > > > -Larry > > > > > > "istoff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:26:34 -0500, "Joe M."

<[email hidden]>

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Thanks to all. Installation was a breeze (knock on wood). > Uninstalled > > > old > > > > >drivers, swapped cards, booted VGA, installed 30.82's and smooth > > sailing > > > so > > > > >far after testing CFS3, IL2, Tiger Woods 2003 Demo, and FS2002. > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Glad to hear of your success. > > > > > > > > Is this a worthwhile upgrade? I like to have a substantial leap in > > > > performance when I upgrade CPU, videocard, whatever. > > > > Hardware is pretty expensive in South Africa, so I tend to upgrade

in > > > > nearly 2 year intervals. > > > > > > > > Where is the biggest benefit in upgrading with regard to gameplay > > > > issues, framerates etc. I don't mean benchmarks, but actual gameplay > > > > benefits. People love to tell me what a card can do, but half thetime

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > > the features aren't enabled because of side effects. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards all, > > > > istoff > > > > > > > > > > > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wRty9.74169$[email hidden]... > Joe, > > It varies from a high of abt. 24 fps (I'm running a GF2 GTS on a 1.3T'bird) > to a low of abt. zero fps (the whole show just stutters to a halt for a > second or so). I'm not ready to upgrade the CPU (saving my dimes &nickels, > tho), but am planning to replace the vid with either a GF4-4400 or an ATI > 9500 Pro. Any recommendations? Steve, The GF4 4400 was a free upgrade (long story short - a friend couldn't use it) but I wouldn't have bought it since it's not THAT much better than my GF3 Ti 500. I'm actually DROOLING for an ATI 9700 Pro (waiting to due a dynamic duo upgrade: AMD 2200XP and ATI 9700) so I imagine a slightly less powerful version would be terrific as well. I'm an old V5 5500 FSAA fan, especially for flight sims, and the guys in the flight-sim group claim that ATI has finally exceeded the FSAA mastery of 3dfx. If you value FSAA then you should absolutely look real hard at ATI. If not, the 4400 overclocked to 4600 levels is a great value (I have a gainward golden sample that is practically guaranteed to overclock), especially in a few more months. BTW, driver support has been surprisingly good for ATI given their less than impressive support reputation. -- Joe

Joe, Not even a GF4-4600 is much improvement over a GF2 Ultra...if it's only GPL yer playing. But since I am now getting into next-gen (DX9) games like NOLF2, the 4400 should do fine there. On my other 'puta, I'm starting to do a lot of graphics processing (incl., eventually, DV), so I figure the 9500 Pro will be okay...for now. When, as, and if I upgrade the OS to XP and the CPU to a 2.8 P4 (which is the plan), I'll probably want better graphics h/w (like the GF5 or ATI's equiv.). Thx for the discuss. --Steve "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:wRty9.74169$[email hidden]... > > Joe, > > > > It varies from a high of abt. 24 fps (I'm running a GF2 GTS on a 1.3 > T'bird) > > to a low of abt. zero fps (the whole show just stutters to a halt for a > > second or so). I'm not ready to upgrade the CPU (saving my dimes & > nickels, > > tho), but am planning to replace the vid with either a GF4-4400 or an

ATI

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > 9500 Pro. Any recommendations? > > Steve, > > The GF4 4400 was a free upgrade (long story short - a friend couldn't use > it) but I wouldn't have bought it since it's not THAT much better than my > GF3 Ti 500. I'm actually DROOLING for an ATI 9700 Pro (waiting to due a > dynamic duo upgrade: AMD 2200XP and ATI 9700) so I imagine a slightly less > powerful version would be terrific as well. > > I'm an old V5 5500 FSAA fan, especially for flight sims, and the guys in

the > flight-sim group claim that ATI has finally exceeded the FSAA mastery of > 3dfx. If you value FSAA then you should absolutely look real hard at ATI. > If not, the 4400 overclocked to 4600 levels is a great value (I have a > gainward golden sample that is practically guaranteed to overclock), > especially in a few more months. BTW, driver support has beensurprisingly > good for ATI given their less than impressive support reputation. > > -- > Joe > >

Somebody else here said it very nicely. CPU provides speed, Vid card provide eye candy. If you have an underpowered cpu, the fastest vid card in the world ain't gonna improve things much. With the high cost of 1 generation video cards, you can almost always get far better performance increases for the money by upgrading your cpu/memory than buying the latest gadget-filled video card. dave henrie "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:tVzy9.75348$[email hidden]... > Joe, > > Not even a GF4-4600 is much improvement over a GF2 Ultra...if it's onlyGPL > yer playing. But since I am now getting into next-gen (DX9) games like > NOLF2, the 4400 should do fine there. On my other 'puta, I'm starting todo > a lot of graphics processing (incl., eventually, DV), so I figure the 9500 > Pro will be okay...for now. When, as, and if I upgrade the OS to XP andthe > CPU to a 2.8 P4 (which is the plan), I'll probably want better graphicsh/w

Quoted text (15 lines)

> (like the GF5 or ATI's equiv.). > > Thx for the discuss. > > --Steve > > "Joe M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:wRty9.74169$[email hidden]... > > > Joe, > > > > > > It varies from a high of abt. 24 fps (I'm running a GF2 GTS on a 1.3 > > T'bird) > > > to a low of abt. zero fps (the whole show just stutters to a halt for

a

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > second or so). I'm not ready to upgrade the CPU (saving my dimes & > > nickels, > > > tho), but am planning to replace the vid with either a GF4-4400 or an > ATI > > > 9500 Pro. Any recommendations? > > > > Steve, > > > > The GF4 4400 was a free upgrade (long story short - a friend couldn't

use > > it) but I wouldn't have bought it since it's not THAT much better thanmy > > GF3 Ti 500. I'm actually DROOLING for an ATI 9700 Pro (waiting to duea > > dynamic duo upgrade: AMD 2200XP and ATI 9700) so I imagine a slightlyless > > powerful version would be terrific as well. > > > > I'm an old V5 5500 FSAA fan, especially for flight sims, and the guys in > the > > flight-sim group claim that ATI has finally exceeded the FSAA mastery of > > 3dfx. If you value FSAA then you should absolutely look real hard atATI.

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > If not, the 4400 overclocked to 4600 levels is a great value (I have a > > gainward golden sample that is practically guaranteed to overclock), > > especially in a few more months. BTW, driver support has been > surprisingly > > good for ATI given their less than impressive support reputation. > > > > -- > > Joe > > > > > >

>. With the high cost of 1 generation video cards, > you can almost always get far better performance increases for the moneyby > upgrading your cpu/memory than buying the latest gadget-filled video card. > dave henrie Tell me about it. A friend of mine has a P4 2.4 with a GF2 Ultra, and it smokes my GF3 on an AMD XP1800. My card is overclocked, and I have done Tom's tweaks, and he still smokes me without them. MadDAWG

> Tell me about it. A friend of mine has a P4 2.4 with a GF2 Ultra, and it > smokes my GF3 on an AMD XP1800. My card is overclocked, and I have done > Tom's tweaks, and he still smokes me without them. I bet he doesn't smoke you at 1600x1200. (Except maybe in GPL)

> I bet he doesn't smoke you at 1600x1200. (Except maybe in GPL) To be honest I have not been that impressed with my GF3 over my GF2 GTS. As far as 1600 x 1200 goes I wouldn't even dare run NR2002 that high. After Xmas I'm thinking about making the switch to ATI. Of course that's after I max out my motherboard's CPU capabilities with an XP2100. MadDAWG

> To be honest I have not been that impressed with my GF3 over my GF2 GTS.As > far as 1600 x 1200 goes I wouldn't even dare run NR2002 that high. After > Xmas I'm thinking about making the switch to ATI. Of course that's after I > max out my motherboard's CPU capabilities with an XP2100. I haven't been terribly impressed with my Ti4400 either. nVidia have certainly become complacent.

My Ti4400 has been great. I can run all options at full, 43 car forward and back at 1600X1200 and never see frame rates drop low enough to be even close to a problem. -Larry "Andrew Williams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aqupe9$cvd8e$[email hidden]... > > To be honest I have not been that impressed with my GF3 over my GF2 GTS. > As > > far as 1600 x 1200 goes I wouldn't even dare run NR2002 that high. After > > Xmas I'm thinking about making the switch to ATI. Of course that's afterI > > max out my motherboard's CPU capabilities with an XP2100. > > I haven't been terribly impressed with my Ti4400 either. nVidia have > certainly become complacent. > >