Ti 4200-8x?

Do you care about pure performance?

kitten.may.cry wrote on 2022-06-02, 11:49:

Ti 4200-8x?

Yes model is TI-4200-TD8X.

Ti 4200
They are roughly equal and you'll be CPU limited either way, but you can use the GF4 with older drivers so it may perform better.

idan182 wrote on 2022-06-02, 11:39:

Far cry works on the lowest settings but I can't reach more than 15-19fps on open map.

Also because of the slow CPU.

I think you're better off with a P4 system + FX card, overclocked.

Random beat me to it, 1 second away.

Maybe, by using de FX5600, you can turn 2X Antialiasing and 4X or 2X AF without much FPS penalty (that´s what I do) and balance the workload more towards the strong GPU instead of the "weak" CPU.

I am currently using an FX5600 on a 1.26 Tualatin system. I noticed the performance upgrade from the 128bit GFMX440 previously installed, in games like COD. But I tend to think it is a card that is being "wasted" on a PentiumIII, that it could serve better in an Athlon XP 2500+, for instance.
I also own a (Medion branded) GF4 4200ti, but I am afraid to use it regurlarly since they are getting hard to find and expensive. I am not sure you can do that (turning AA and AF on) with the 4200ti and get a similar result.

If you don't want to be CPU bottlenecked find a 1GHz+ P3 and use the FX 5600, otherwise the Ti 4200 will be more compatible with games and only marginally slower if at all.

Ti4200 is like the *perfect* Win98 card, and faster than the vanilla FX5600 to boot! Definitely use that one.

I would definitely use FX5600 and swap in a PIII 1Ghz or 900Mhz depending on what your board supports. FX5600 with 45.x driver is quite compatible. I would keep Ti4200 as a backup in case FX5600 fails one day.

I did this research recently. Ti4200 in practice is a little slower than the 5600. But in some scenarios, the ti4200 does better. Every FX series is not very good, if you are willing, I would recommend a GF 6200 NV43. It has great power consumption, generates little heat, and is a good investment if you want to play with transforming it into a GF 6600. Of course, it's a bit much for a Pentium 3, but in practice, the pentium 3's companion it would be a GF2 or GF3...

A little overclocking with good ventilation, your GF4200 can turn into a GF 4600. Also, for Win9x, your best option would be GF4.

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-06-02, 20:43:

I did this research recently. Ti4200 in practice is a little slower than the 5600. But in some scenarios, the ti4200 does better. Every FX series is not very good, if you are willing, I would recommend a GF 6200 NV43. It has great power consumption, generates little heat, and is a good investment if you want to play with transforming it into a GF 6600. Of course, it's a bit much for a Pentium 3, but in practice, the pentium 3's companion it would be a GF2 or GF3...

A little overclocking with good ventilation, your GF4200 can turn into a GF 4600. Also, for Win9x, your best option would be GF4.

Only very early 6200s can be unlocked into a 6600. Later 6200s had their extra pipelines laser cut and weren't unlockable. I have 5 or 6 6200s and only 1 of them could have their pipelines unlocked.

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-06-02, 21:51:

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-06-02, 20:43:

I did this research recently. Ti4200 in practice is a little slower than the 5600. But in some scenarios, the ti4200 does better. Every FX series is not very good, if you are willing, I would recommend a GF 6200 NV43. It has great power consumption, generates little heat, and is a good investment if you want to play with transforming it into a GF 6600. Of course, it's a bit much for a Pentium 3, but in practice, the pentium 3's companion it would be a GF2 or GF3...

A little overclocking with good ventilation, your GF4200 can turn into a GF 4600. Also, for Win9x, your best option would be GF4.

Only very early 6200s can be unlocked into a 6600. Later 6200s had their extra pipelines laser cut and weren't unlockable. I have 5 or 6 6200s and only 1 of them could have their pipelines unlocked.

yes, that's why I specified NV43, NV44 models onwards, can't do the mod anymore. But even so, it's still a good alternative, a 6200 has a performance close to that of an FX5700, sometimes superior and sometimes a little inferior. The interesting thing is just to keep in mind to use 128bit models, not turbocache.

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-06-02, 22:15:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-06-02, 21:51:

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-06-02, 20:43:

I did this research recently. Ti4200 in practice is a little slower than the 5600. But in some scenarios, the ti4200 does better. Every FX series is not very good, if you are willing, I would recommend a GF 6200 NV43. It has great power consumption, generates little heat, and is a good investment if you want to play with transforming it into a GF 6600. Of course, it's a bit much for a Pentium 3, but in practice, the pentium 3's companion it would be a GF2 or GF3...

A little overclocking with good ventilation, your GF4200 can turn into a GF 4600. Also, for Win9x, your best option would be GF4.

Only very early 6200s can be unlocked into a 6600. Later 6200s had their extra pipelines laser cut and weren't unlockable. I have 5 or 6 6200s and only 1 of them could have their pipelines unlocked.

yes, that's why I specified NV43, NV44 models onwards, can't do the mod anymore. But even so, it's still a good alternative, a 6200 has a performance close to that of an FX5700, sometimes superior and sometimes a little inferior. The interesting thing is just to keep in mind to use 128bit models, not turbocache.

I have 4 NV43 based ones and only 1 of them could be unlocked. While nv44 can not be uocked at all it's not foolproof on nv43 some can and some can't.

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-06-02, 23:13:

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-06-02, 22:15:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-06-02, 21:51:

Only very early 6200s can be unlocked into a 6600. Later 6200s had their extra pipelines laser cut and weren't unlockable. I have 5 or 6 6200s and only 1 of them could have their pipelines unlocked.

yes, that's why I specified NV43, NV44 models onwards, can't do the mod anymore. But even so, it's still a good alternative, a 6200 has a performance close to that of an FX5700, sometimes superior and sometimes a little inferior. The interesting thing is just to keep in mind to use 128bit models, not turbocache.

I have 4 NV43 based ones and only 1 of them could be unlocked. While nv44 can not be uocked at all it's not foolproof on nv43 some can and some can't.

All NV43A's use the same die as the 6600, they are 6600's that failed some factory test and had their pipes disabled. I don't know if there was an NV43B, but every NV43 I've had, I've been able to enable pipelines. Some gave me artifact problems as they were really defective.

I remember something similar happening with AMD processors from the Phenon era, which turned into Athlon, I used a modified bios that enabled additional cores.

It was just those two cards back in the day I did it to quite a few 6200s for friends. The only thing I can think of is they were actually nv44 cores but we're recognized incorrectly by Rivatuner. They two that wouldn't unlock we're both xfx cards not sure if that means anything or not. I should try and find them and pull the coolers off and make sure they are actually NV43

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-06-03, 00:55:

It was just those two cards back in the day I did it to quite a few 6200s for friends. The only thing I can think of is they were actually nv44 cores but we're recognized incorrectly by Rivatuner. They two that wouldn't unlock we're both xfx cards not sure if that means anything or not. I should try and find them and pull the coolers off and make sure they are actually NV43

Yup. Around here in my country, there were even counterfeit models that were NV44 "transformed" into NV43 (they sanded the die, and printed a barcode label with model NV43), the NV43 came to cost more too. In fact, even today, they cost more around here.

I had an NV43 of my use until 3 or 4 years ago, I sold it when I managed to get a HD3870 and a 4650 AGP

I would not recommend GeForce 6200 at all as it requires less compatible driver 66.94. The last driver I can recommend for Win 98 rigs is 45.23. See https://www.philscomputerlab.com/nvidia-9x-gr … cs-drivers.html for what graphics cards it supports. FX5600, FX5800, FX5900, Quadro FX 3000 are all recommended. For PIII 1Ghz anything higher than FX5600 is a waste of its potential. The latter FX cards are best with Athlon XP or P4.

AlexZ wrote on 2022-06-03, 16:59:

I would not recommend GeForce 6200 at all as it requires less compatible driver 66.94. The last driver I can recommend for Win 98 rigs is 45.23. See https://www.philscomputerlab.com/nvidia-9x-gr … cs-drivers.html for what graphics cards it supports. FX5600, FX5800, FX5900, Quadro FX 3000 are all recommended. For PIII 1Ghz anything higher than FX5600 is a waste of its potential. The latter FX cards are best with Athlon XP or P4.

He didn't get the memo.

I was referring to the issue of video cards (no operating system relevance). As I said, for Win9x the best choice is still GF4. Every nvidia FX line was a mistake.

I would use the Voodoo 3 in this PC, and built a second PC--Athlon XP or A64 ( I don't do P4's unless there is no choice) and use the Geforce 4 or (shudder) the FX in that system.