Two crapy cards: Which one sucks less?

[cleeve]

For a server and not gaming?

I can't think of a single possible instance where you would be able to tell the difference.

2d signal quality maybe? The Radeons are known for having better RAMDACS in the 7x00/Geforce 1 generations of cards.

 

[dos1986]

Thanks man I knew I wasnt going crazy as i had an ati 7000 and it never had T&L thanks man for clearing that up as i was having my doubts.I remember now I bought a Geforce 4 ti4200 cause it had T&L and i could play gta3

 

[angry_ducky]

We are after all talking about hardware from the year 2000.

Not quite. The ATI was released October 2, 2001. My old PC has a GF2, and it's from Feb. 2002. So I'd have to guess that the GF4 is from 2003ish.

 

[mesarectifier]

Dude I run a Cirrus Logic (I think!!) 2mb graphics card on my server, and that works just dandy. Granted if you want to run a big screen on it or have any sort of decent colour/resolution you'll need something a little better than that, but those two'll do just great.

If you really wana make the choice, I don't know that much about the technicalities, but my GF4MX440 is okay-ish at gaming, but my friend's R7000 is absolute crap.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

:?: - I have an older machine running Windows Server 2003. The machine performs just fine, but I have two video card options: The built in GeForce 4MX video card w/ 32 megs of ram, or an ATI 7000 series w/ 64 megs of ram. Which one is better?

I know the ATI has twice the amount of RAM, but I'm not even sure which card is newer, let alone which one is faster.

Granted, both work, and both will prolly do okay for my server, seeing as how I'm not going to do much (if any) gaming on that machine. Just the same, I'd hate to have something with less power when I have a better option available.

Thanks!

Use the NVIDIA. Windows Server 2003 has its own drivers, and WINDOWS 2003 DOES NOT SUPPORT DIRECTX T&L, so it makes no f*cking difference. Man I forget about how many times gamers think they know everything...many gamers give opinions whether or not they are educated on the subject matter.

I recommend NVIDIA because in my experience with Server 2003 it runs better. Also those radeon 7000 cards burn up every once in a while, something I have yet to see any MX card do.

 

[Guest]

Go with the 7000, it will reduce hits on the system memory caused by the shared memory used by the geforce, that is really the only performance issue I can think of in a server environment.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

Just to prevent future confusion, and to prevent false advice--

IF YOU DONT USE SERVERS, DONT GIVE ADVICE ABOUT THEM.

Ahh...well if you want to sound like you have no idea about anything, and want to totally ruin the reputation of the Forumz, I suppose I can't stop you...

Go with the 7000, it will reduce hits on the system memory caused by the shared memory used by the geforce, that is really the only performance issue I can think of in a server environment.

The GeForce4 MX is not integrated. He says it came "built-in" but he means it came with it. No mobo or chipset I know of will support integrated GeForce4 MX graphics...

 

[michaelahess]

Totally agree with you on the server advice part

I have two servers with 7000's in them as they were the crappiest agp cards I had in my pile 'o crap. Never had a prob with either. I also have a cirrus logic and matrox with 4meg each in a couple other servers, never had a prob there either.

I do recal back in the day when I bought my first Radeon, that it kicked my friends mx on Alice and Undying, but that may have just been his crappy hp

 

[jap0nes]

actually, there will be no apparent result using one or another... as he already said, he wants to run with 3 (three) gigabytes of memory... i dont think any size of shared memory would cause much of an impact on system performance... for displaying 2D, both will do the same.
but for psychological reasons, using dedicated memory of 7000 would perform "better"...

i dont see any reason for you aggressiveness, by the way

 

[sojrner]

No mobo or chipset I know of will support integrated GeForce4 MX graphics...

I believe that the nforce2, which are the best socket A mobos out there have integrated graphics on many models. That integrated chip was equal to a gf4mx, just not always called that.

I have one and it works very well, but does use system memory. Not trying to start another fight, just clearing it up a bit.

I agree w/ you on the t&l thing, and I mentioned earlier that for a server games should not be a thought really.

 

[mesarectifier]

Errrr, dude I do run a server, but in a home environment which is what it sounds like this guy wants to. If it was for any other environment I wouldn't 'chip in' but seeing as I have experience in 'amateur' server use and have experience with both cards I offer my opinion, which last time I checked was the whole point. If I really know so little about this then it can be up to this guy to ignore me.

I would point out not to give advice about GF4MX if you don't use them, but that would be childish and oops I already have.

 

[random_foxx]

No mobo or chipset I know of will support integrated GeForce4 MX graphics...

I believe that the nforce2, which are the best socket A mobos out there have integrated graphics on many models. That integrated chip was equal to a gf4mx, just not always called that.


Exactly right --- BIOSTAR M7NCG 400 Socket A (Socket 462) NVIDIA nForce2 IGP Micro ATX AMD Motherboard.

The NVIDIA card is built into the board itself. I've been using the ATI card for a few days, and no issues or trouble. I figure that in the event it fails, I could always fall back to onboard video.

By the way - I -HAVE- hit a major issue w/ SP1. The 3 gigs of RAM work fine, until I install SP1. Then, it will not boot. When I take out the 3rd stick, it loads just fine.

I have a total of four sticks of RAM, but only 3 slots. As a result, I have an extra stick of RAM. I tried swapping out different sticks, to make sure I don't have a bad mem stick. No luck. Once I install SP1, it is as if it will no longer support 3 gigs.

BTW: When I do try to boot, I see the POST screen, but then where I should get the load screen for Server, I only get a gray moniter, and the CRT power light goes yellow, as if it were not being sent a signal. This occurs regardless of video card in use. Any ideas? If not, it's cool, because 2 gig is still overkill. It's PC 2700 RAM, so we have no use for it in any other system except the server.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

So...you have NForce2 graphics then. I have a couple of GeForce4 MX cards that I've used for a few years in older PCs, PCI and AGP flavors--I thought that was what you were referring to (being that NVIDIA does not create them for integrated graphics). In this case though, a separate video card would be the better choice. Shared memory, even if you have 8GB RAM, will always decrease overall performance--though very little in this config.

SP1 issues? Must admit I've never heard of that specific issue. I'm guessing you've verified it isn't one memory stick in particular causing the issue? Or one slot in particular?

 

[bourgeoisdude]

Errrr, dude I do run a server, but in a home environment which is what it sounds like this guy wants to. If it was for any other environment I wouldn't 'chip in' but seeing as I have experience in 'amateur' server use and have experience with both cards I offer my opinion, which last time I checked was the whole point. If I really know so little about this then it can be up to this guy to ignore me.

I would point out not to give advice about GF4MX if you don't use them, but that would be childish and oops I already have.

Like I said, I use a couple of GeForce4 MX cards. I try to assume the card is a GeForce4 MX since that is what it was called. I was wrong, and forgot that some vendors also call it by the wrong name...

...Anyway, the point was about the Server OS. NVIDIA doesn't even provide drivers for Server 2003. OpenGL is not supported, neither is T&L. Therefore, based on the assumtion that the GF4MX was an actual GF4MX card, my recommendation would have been strictly to ensure stability. Radeon 7000 may be faster on a server, but the GF4MX cards, crummy as they are, haven't even begun to approach critical temperatures. They suck but are rock-solid hardware.

 

[mesarectifier]

He did say it was built in, but thas cool. It's just a bit lame when people get agressive when all anyone's trying to do is help each other out.

Anyway, what I was actually gonna say was:

Is power consumption an issue? I was also gona ask people if they knew whether a GF4MX built-in GPU uses more or less wattage than a card GPU?

If the OS doesn't support any of the extra features of the GF4 then just use the ATi and save 😱 64mb 😱 of RAM

 

[bourgeoisdude]

If the OS doesn't support any of the extra features of the GF4 then just use the ATi and save 64mb of RAM

Yep, I do agree with that. Does the intg. use more power? I honestly don't know--GF4MX cards use much less power than most modern "value" cards--like, for example, the ATI X300SE. The Radeon 7000 is a little older than the GF4MX if I recall (and definately older than the X300se), so needless to say it should be very close.

 

[mesarectifier]

Is it true then, that power consumption in graphics cards has only become a real issue with the newer 6xxx and above cards?

 

[cleeve]

I don't think there's a 4-or-less pipeline card out there that is a power hog by todays standards... maybe the newest 7300 GS and X1300's that have really fast cores.

PSUs didn't really become a factor until the higher-tech cards... 8 pipeline cards like the 9700 PRO.

But a radeon 7000 or Nforce4 Geforce? Power is a non-issue, mate.

Really, this is a whole lot of discussion about a choice which makes little-to-no difference.

Radeon 7000:
Probably slightly better display quality, dedicated RAM, slightly more power consumption

Geforce MX:
Probably worse display quality, shared RAM, slightly less power consumption


Like I said, regardless of your choice you will probably never, ever notice the difference...