![[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 > Gf2 Mx400?
- Thread starter bobsaget
- Start date
StrandgecK
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2003
- Messages
- 41
they're both good for Quake 3 and lower games.
botreaper10
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2004
- Messages
- 445
Correct me if i am wrong, but isn't the gf4 mx just a gf2 core? If that is the case, they should both perform about the same. I think the gf2 mx would be better since it isn't stealing system ram.
LightSwitch
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2004
- Messages
- 119
thats exactly what i was thinking
No, the GF4MX is actually a pretty big leap in capability over the GF2MX.
Remember that the GF2MX was quite a bit slower than the GeForce-DDR, which was slower than the GeForce2-DDR, which was slower than the GeForce2-Pro, which was slower than the GeForce2-Ti, which was slower than the GeForce2-Ultra.
The GF4MX is basically a GeForce2-Super-Duper-Ultra, so it should punish the GF2MX pretty harshly.
The GF4MX line was ragged on because it was nothing more than a souped-up version of the GF2 line...in the age of DX8 and Radeon 8500s and GeForce4Tis.
If you could have taken a GF4MX back in time a couple years, it would have reigned supreme quite easily.
In fact, here ya go. A review showing the mid-range GeForce4MX (right about what the nForce2 integrated solution is using) going toe-to-toe with a GeForce2 Ultra nicely. It wins most tests, loses a couple, but not by much.
Remember that the GF2MX was quite a bit slower than the GeForce-DDR, which was slower than the GeForce2-DDR, which was slower than the GeForce2-Pro, which was slower than the GeForce2-Ti, which was slower than the GeForce2-Ultra.
The GF4MX is basically a GeForce2-Super-Duper-Ultra, so it should punish the GF2MX pretty harshly.
The GF4MX line was ragged on because it was nothing more than a souped-up version of the GF2 line...in the age of DX8 and Radeon 8500s and GeForce4Tis.
If you could have taken a GF4MX back in time a couple years, it would have reigned supreme quite easily.
In fact, here ya go. A review showing the mid-range GeForce4MX (right about what the nForce2 integrated solution is using) going toe-to-toe with a GeForce2 Ultra nicely. It wins most tests, loses a couple, but not by much.