![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
GF4 MX440 $33....worth it??
- Thread starter Poison
- Start date
HarryPleasure
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2003
- Messages
- 412
Yes thats a decent deal for that card. Just remember, you get what you pay for.
leukotriene
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2002
- Messages
- 2,664
It's a good deal if it has 400MHz effective RAM and 275MHz core. Otherwise, it's just an okay deal 
I can play UT2K3 on my Geforce 2 MX. 1024x768x16bit.
The Geforce 4 MX 440 is at least twice the card the Geforce 2 MX is.
I haven't found a 9100 for $53. Got a link? Cheapest I've found was about $70 @ Newegg.
And no, I'm not ripping you on this one, the wife plays War3, G2MX gets a bit slow on that one on the heavier maps...
Well when i ment by "play" i didn't mean it won't run. But to each his own..if i can't have everything maxed out and play the game at full potential im not really "playing" the game. I don't want to run like crap with great fps just to play it...i dunno but thats me. Sure you can "run" ut2k3 on a geforce2 but not the way you would want it, at least not the way i would want to play it.
Here is the link for a Ati Radeon 9100 128mb DDR AGP video card for $49
http://www.cnetpc.com/productinfo.asp?item=VG-ATR9100P
Here is the link for a Ati Radeon 9100 128mb DDR AGP video card for $49
http://www.cnetpc.com/productinfo.asp?item=VG-ATR9100P
F
fallguy
Guest
Obviously that is very subjective. To most "gamers" it would be far from, how you say, dandy?
As long as people are happy though, thats all that matters...
What makes you think you have a faster system? What makes you think an athlon 64 can outrun a P4 HT TODAY? is Halo a 64bit app? NO. So then you don't have a faster system compared to mine for playing Halo, i have the same ram, same timings...i get a steady 40fps with 1024x768 32, 6XAA,8XAF detail high, believe me or not i really don't care
F
fallguy
Guest
Give it up Mikey... there is no doubt Jared has a faster PC.
heck, even the number by his name is higher
heck, even the number by his name is higher
F
fallguy
Guest
Holy cow, you are seriously misinformed.
First, HT does nothing for fps in games. Just because its a A64 doesnt mean it cant scream thru 32bit games/apps. I suggest reading up before making yourself look even more foolish.
First, HT does nothing for fps in games. Just because its a A64 doesnt mean it cant scream thru 32bit games/apps. I suggest reading up before making yourself look even more foolish.
Originally posted by fallguy
Holy cow, you are seriously misinformed.
First, HT does nothing for fps in games. Just because its a A64 doesnt mean it cant scream thru 32bit games/apps. I suggest reading up before making yourself look even more foolish.
A64 does nothing for fps in games niether. he may have a faster system but it seems i get better results in halo go figure
Guess i was misinformed excuse me
F
fallguy
Guest
Im at a loss for words. Its obvious you dont know how things work.
Originally posted by Mikey20
A64 does nothing for fps in games...he may have a faster system but it seems i get better results in halo go figure
stop posting misinformation. i have no problem with you asking "dumb" questions, but posting statements that are blatantly wrong is not acceptable
it's pretty much given that the a64 is a faster chip when it comes to games. here are a couple reviews that show the fx51 beating out the 3.2 p4 in most games
http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc1LDQ=
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1946&p=5
his rig is faster than yours. the difference is that you consider 40fps to be acceptable, but he sets his minimum at 60
what maps do you play? i admit on some maps i get over 200 fps a lot of the time and over 100 constantly, but on certain maps i sometimes still drop to 30 fps. i have lowered my settings as low as i am willing to, at 640x 480 it looks horrible to me and i dont want to take off any of the features of halo, i have tried 1024x 768 but couldnt stand having lower dips. i find the game to be very choppy at anything under 60 (i use fraps to monitor what im getting) in heavy gunfire on certain maps i was getting drops into the 20's which makes the game hard to control and has much less control. i play the game competitively so need all the control i can get. if you get 40 fps on blood gulch then on certain maps you drop to like 10-15
ok, i can agree that that could be possible then, i havent actually put the game to that so i dont know what id get, but 40 max is actually possible unless 40 average. i try to keep the game to where it NEVER gets below 60, although if few rare situations it does happen
F
fallguy
Guest
rotflmao
Yea, if you can tweak Windows enough you can run rthdribl on a Geforce 2 MX.
Go ahead, inform us please...
I'll admit, playable is 45fps with occasional 30fps dips for me. It aint perfect, but UT2k3 is playable.
Another area mentioned, playing online requires more overhead, I don't play online over my 56k, so that isn't an issue. Multiplayer does suck on this system, that is what my tvbox is for.