That's the more common dual VGA version. Some OEMs also made a single VGA layout. I wanted one of these for some time to test specifically against a GeForce 2 Ultra. I wanted one with a DVI port and had to get mine shipped in from Germany.

I don't know why this card is so hard to find. I guess it was released so late that there weren't very many of them made. It was also not very price competitive when compared with the GeForce 4 Ti 4200, so maybe people weren't buying it either.

pc-sound-legacy wrote on 2022-06-16, 21:50:

I got a GeForce MX 460 today. I never had one so far, so it is welcome in my collection of AGP cards! I'm curious how much faster it is in comparison with the more common 440?

I bought the exact same card after the GF 4 MX 460 was mentioned on here and it also arrived this week. 😉

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 02:15:

That's the more common dual VGA version. Some OEMs also made a single VGA layout. I wanted one of these for some time to test specifically against a GeForce 2 Ultra. I wanted one with a DVI port and had to get mine shipped in from Germany.

I don't know why this card is so hard to find. I guess it was released so late that there weren't very many of them made. It was also not very price competitive when compared with the GeForce 4 Ti 4200, so maybe people weren't buying it either.

The wiki mentions something about this (CTRL+F "There were 3 initial models" and read from there). It was actually discontinued earlier because it was indeed not competitive.
It's a slightly higher clocked MX440. MX420 was the cheapest graphics solution of that gen at release. Later on we got all the SE and MX480 and MX4000 and 8x variants. Just to make it a little bit more confusing 😜

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 02:15:

That's the more common dual VGA version. Some OEMs also made a single VGA layout. I wanted one of these for some time to test specifically against a GeForce 2 Ultra. I wanted one with a DVI port and had to get mine shipped in from Germany.

I don't know why this card is so hard to find. I guess it was released so late that there weren't very many of them made. It was also not very price competitive when compared with the GeForce 4 Ti 4200, so maybe people weren't buying it either.

Well you have the
MX440 4x - 275/400 (128bit bus)
MX440 8x - 275/500 (128bit bus, NV18)
MX440 8x - 275/500 (32bit bus, NV18_A2) I dont understand why this one exists .. 32bit bus . .jesus.
MX440 SE - 250/332 (64bit bus, 4x)
MX440 SE - 250/332(128bit bus, 4x)

MX460 - 300/450 (128bit bus)
MX480 - 250/333 (128bit bus)
MX4000 - 250/332 (64bit bus, 8x)

Even more confusing is the MX4000 which is the MX440SE (64bit) with 8x ...go home nVidia you are drunk. WTF does this card exist.

Sucha confusing setup, I assumed wrongly that the 480 was faster than either of them, nVidia really messed up the segments there.

Guess I need to grab a MX460 for the shelf.

pc-sound-legacy wrote on 2022-06-16, 21:50:

I got a GeForce MX 460 today. I never had one so far, so it is welcome in my collection of AGP cards! I'm curious how much faster it is in comparison with the more common 440?

Depending on the card's clocks it's 10% to 25% faster than the MX440

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-06-17, 08:31:

Well you have the MX440 4x - 275/400 (128bit bus) MX440 8x - 275/500 (128bit bus, NV18) MX440 8x - 275/500 (32bit bus, NV18_A2) […]
Show full quote

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 02:15:

That's the more common dual VGA version. Some OEMs also made a single VGA layout. I wanted one of these for some time to test specifically against a GeForce 2 Ultra. I wanted one with a DVI port and had to get mine shipped in from Germany.

I don't know why this card is so hard to find. I guess it was released so late that there weren't very many of them made. It was also not very price competitive when compared with the GeForce 4 Ti 4200, so maybe people weren't buying it either.

Well you have the
MX440 4x - 275/400 (128bit bus)
MX440 8x - 275/500 (128bit bus, NV18)
MX440 8x - 275/500 (32bit bus, NV18_A2) I dont understand why this one exists .. 32bit bus . .jesus.
MX440 SE - 250/332 (64bit bus, 4x)
MX440 SE - 250/332(128bit bus, 4x)

MX460 - 300/450 (128bit bus)
MX480 - 250/333 (128bit bus)
MX4000 - 250/332 (64bit bus, 8x)

Even more confusing is the MX4000 which is the MX440SE (64bit) with 8x ...go home nVidia you are drunk. WTF does this card exist.

Sucha confusing setup, I assumed wrongly that the 480 was faster than either of them, nVidia really messed up the segments there.

Guess I need to grab a MX460 for the shelf.

NVidia did this on purpose to confuse people into thinking the MX480 was a better product. Many companies tend to do this. I was for instance surprised the HD5850 was supposedly a bit faster than the HD6850 even though the HD6850 was (when assuming from the name) supposed to be the HD5850's successor.
It's kinda similar to bait-n-switch.

This is why I tend to prefer to verify and do some research first and not trust solely on manufacturer nomenclatures.

In computing, a higher number doesn't always mean that it's better 😜

That MX 440 with a 32-bit bus sounds wonderfully terrible. I want one.

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 11:44:

That MX 440 with a 32-bit bus sounds wonderfully terrible. I want one.

Sounds perfect for my Rambus 1.4 P4

🤣

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-06-17, 12:54:

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 11:44:

That MX 440 with a 32-bit bus sounds wonderfully terrible. I want one.

Sounds perfect for my Rambus 1.4 P4

🤣

I beg to differ.
1.3ghz Pentium 4. Otherwise it sounds too close to PIII 1.4 Tualatin...
Be serious 😉

Tetrium wrote on 2022-06-17, 09:53:

I was for instance surprised the HD5850 was supposedly a bit faster than the HD6850 even though the HD6850 was (when assuming from the name) supposed to be the HD5850's successor.

Yah the HD6950 was the more directly equivalent successor. There's a few things though where the HD6850 wins slightly over the 5850, but other things where 5850 makes it look quite bad. Due to better/longer support and I guess minor seeming tweaks, the 6850 stayed useful a lot longer. One or two "modern" games could be played on it even at 1024x768 or 720p. Approx equivalence is a GT650 non Ti. It's more like a 120W card than a 170W approx too, and depending on implementation you might run it with a single 6 pin PCIe power, though versions intended to appeal to overclockers had 2 like the 6870. Anyhoo, just saying a HD6850 is worth consideration on it's own merits, wide span of gaming years covered, lower stressed than the topper top end cards and a bit less heaty.

A moment of silence plzkthx, this weeks "one that got away"....

Looks promising.
'cause it's Intel inside 😉

that's some nice cookies in that tin

BitWrangler wrote on 2022-06-17, 14:10:

A moment of silence plzkthx, this weeks "one that got away"....

Intel branded Memory wtF is this...

Radical Vision wrote on 2022-06-17, 16:33:

BitWrangler wrote on 2022-06-17, 14:10:

A moment of silence plzkthx, this weeks "one that got away"....

Intel branded Memory wtF is this...

Well, Intel was originally a memory manufacturer prior becoming involved in the CPU business. 😀

All I wanted was a GA-6BXC Rev 2 that I didn't have to work on and here I am with recap board #2 but at least this one just has some caps bulgin a little bit and nothing else lookin wrong. Thankfully, since I never finished the other one I've got some caps to spare but I was trying to avoid that

Nexxen wrote on 2022-06-17, 12:58:

I beg to differ. 1.3ghz Pentium 4. Otherwise it sounds too close to PIII 1.4 Tualatin... Be serious ;) […]
Show full quote

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-06-17, 12:54:

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 11:44:

That MX 440 with a 32-bit bus sounds wonderfully terrible. I want one.

Sounds perfect for my Rambus 1.4 P4

🤣

I beg to differ.
1.3ghz Pentium 4. Otherwise it sounds too close to PIII 1.4 Tualatin...
Be serious 😉

well I dont have the 1.3 P4...yet but im going to run tests to see how the 1.4 P3 DDR holds up against the 1.4 P4 Rdimm. I have a feeling the P3 will run circles around the P4 but will have issues matching its memory bandwidth.

We shall see!

Gmlb256 wrote on 2022-06-17, 17:28:

Radical Vision wrote on 2022-06-17, 16:33:

BitWrangler wrote on 2022-06-17, 14:10:

A moment of silence plzkthx, this weeks "one that got away"....

Intel branded Memory wtF is this...

Well, Intel was originally a memory manufacturer prior becoming involved in the CPU business. 😀

Same as AMD it apperas... As i did read about AMDs history and i know about them, but did not know about intel... Since they was formed in 1978 they started making CPUs..

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-06-17, 12:54:

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-06-17, 11:44:

That MX 440 with a 32-bit bus sounds wonderfully terrible. I want one.

Sounds perfect for my Rambus 1.4 P4

🤣

Fun fact. My parents bought me a computer around the year 2000 that was supposed to "last me through college", and it was a Pentium 4 1.4Ghz with RDRAM. So I am intimately familiar with this platform. 😀

I lasted about five years. It was a good investment, and really catapulted my technical prowess. I did a lot of work during that time with computers and technology and was able to save enough money to pay for the next upgrade myself. In in a sense, it did last me through college.

The first problem I ran into was the 256MB of memory. It was more than enough for Windows 98. It was also fine in Windows 2000, albeit with more frequent disk swapping, but it was not enough for Windows XP, which really chugged. I wanted to upgrade the memory for some time, but RDRAM prices were stupid expensive. So I instead saved that money to put towards a whole new computer.

My next upgrade was an Athlon 64 3400+ with 3GB of RAM and a GeForce 68000 GT. The uplift was incredible.

I never really thought of my Pentium 4 as slow. In fact, for years, anything I threw at it ran very well. I had a 19" monitor and a GeForce 2 Ultra, and could run everything at 1600x1200 with max FPS for years. It was also an incredibly stable platform. I never had issues with crashes or instability from the hardware ever.

So, yeah. On paper, these processors aren't much to look at, and they aged very poorly as the Pentium 4 line progressed. But for the time, it was a great platform.

Also quite ironic, an MX 440 would be about as fast as my GeForce 2 Ultra. So you're basically making fun of the same configuration I grew up with in my Kate childhood. I still think it was a great system, and I'll fight you to defend it. Haha.

So as i found that the temperatures on the Voodoo V 5500 chips are dumb high (specially the primary chip closest to the VGA port is really burning fingers....) and i never like to use hardware that cook itself slowly over the years (sure these cards working fine like that, but still they may die at some point from overheating..), so i plan to freeze the card in freezer and then to pop off the garbage joke of a heatsinks and replace them with at least 5 times bigger heatsinks and fans, or maybe even Zalman coolers. Thing is i think there is a chance when the card is frozen solder joint/s to crack as well, so that is the problem for me. But i think if i press hard plastic card on the voodoo card that touches the Napalm chip there wont be a problem with broken solder joints.. As the card is so expensive and rare these days i dont want to fuck it up, but also using it with these joke of a heatsinks is also not acceptable to me... The video shows it, but these solder BGA joints bother me...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hB4jOCHLHc&ab_channel=Storm

The revision of the card is A 2300.

Not sure if there is termal limit to these chips, if the limit is 100c then is whatever but still.

So any suggestions, tips, thoughts and whatever....