Found that a GF4-ti4200, though faster than a Radeon9600, is shit compared to Radeon9600.
All sort of quirks regarding Win98 games from around 1999 to 2001.
Think the GF4-ti4200 is more suited for WinXP era stuff, than Win98 era stuff.
As an example. The GF4 would not display NFS-2K propperly unless Antialiasing was enabled.
And it gave some wierd off-color vertical line in UT99, farthest in the left of the screen.
When running RTCW, it ran really well without any issues at all.
Now... Despite the lack of speed (200 points 3dMark99 lower than GF4), the 9600 ran EVERYTHING
without any issues at all... Yeah. GF4 is XP era stuff. And yeah.... Said I would not build any P4 machine
in Phils thread. I will go for an AMD64 instead. Have all hardware except PSU, Case, and a AMD64 CPU.
The 9600 has one more advantage over the GF4. When being punished by high performing games.
I can not feel any heat on the cooler at all. 😳 I mean.... 😳 😳 WHY?
That is some serious well designed GPU, compared to the GF4 running that hot and only 200 points higher.
What gives??? The 9600 has one of those small flimsy coolers, so it can not be that. Or can it?
Other than that. Well... Played some Serious Sam Second Encounter Gold. (don't know what gold means)
And what a delitefull and fun game that is. Oh yeah. Allmost as fun as Duke3D.
Don't eat stuff off a 15 year old never cleaned cpu cooler.
Those cakes make you sick....
My blog: http://to9xct.blogspot.dk
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/brostenen
001100 010010 011110 100001 101101 110011