# gforce ti



## Mahender_Topgun (Sep 26, 2004)

hi,

what is it advisable to go in for a geforce 4 ti now....

if so what is the price(new).


----------



## Nemesis (Sep 26, 2004)

it's better if u get an fx series card....ti series is kinda old


----------



## nikhilesh (Sep 26, 2004)

but its no lesser than the FX's .its according to ur budget mate.


----------



## medpal (Sep 26, 2004)

geforce 4 ti is an old war horse but still as much worthy as it was then.

you can get it if your budget is restricted.

but now a days it is hard to get through the dealers, you have to search a lot.

if you do not find it and your budget can be extended little you can get a geforce fx 5200 or 5700 at the least.

i do not know exactly the performance range of the ati cards but still radeon 9200 should be in the sme range.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 26, 2004)

It's better to go for a gforce4 ti rather than a weak fx card. ti will cost less if u compare it to a card of same performance of  fx series. thats why i bought a ti4200.  and dont go for a fx 5200 its really weak considering the games today. fx 5200 will cost abt 3500 and a ti4200 for 7500,ti4400 for 8500, ti4600 abt 10500 approx.


----------



## anidex (Sep 26, 2004)

I suggest staying away from DX8.1 cards, be it the GeForce 4 Ti or the Radeon 9200. The GeForce FX 5200 is a good choice for someone with a low budget, but the X300 is even better.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 26, 2004)

anidex said:
			
		

> I suggest staying away from DX8.1 cards, be it the GeForce 4 Ti or the Radeon 9200. The GeForce FX 5200 is a good choice for someone with a low budget, but the X300 is even better.




Stay away from fx 5200 . one of my friends has 5200 and has to compromise on each game details and performance so i strongly recommend a ti . I played doom3 very well and mt friend having 5200 had to compromise on doom3 a lot ,here is a screenshot of doom3 from my ti4200


*www.geocities.com/tarey_g/shot00012.jpg


----------



## anidex (Sep 26, 2004)

The 5200 can run fragment shaders that the Ti can only dream of. All of the special effects like heat haze need a DX9 level card. So what if the FX 5200 can run the game decently only at 800x600? The Ti ain't gonna be able to come close to the FX 5200 visually anyway!


----------



## blade_runner (Sep 26, 2004)

But dude whats the point if it can display lotsa gfx candy but doesnt have enuf power to process it.


----------



## anidex (Sep 26, 2004)

You can play the game with all those cool effects at a lower resolution just as fast as the Ti. With the Ti, you can't even see those effects though you're playing at a higher resolution.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 27, 2004)

anidex said:
			
		

> You can play the game with all those cool effects at a lower resolution just as fast as the Ti. With the Ti, you can't even see those effects though you're playing at a higher resolution.




I dont understand ....... what is the point if the framerates are choppy on a 5200 better play it on a 4200 or a 4400 with decent framerates. effects are less noticable than framerates.The main thing is the budget, if u have 3500-4000 bucks then 5200 is not a bad choice , if u hav a little more budget then a ti will do the job better. 

and for ur info i've had both the cards and i know better how 5200 lacks in performance.....see yourself

*Test system -* 
Pentium 4C 2.4GHz with Hyper-Threading 
Intel 865GBF Motherboard 
256x2MB Kingston 400MHz DDR-3200 (Dual Channel) 
Seagate 80GB HDD - 7200 RPM


*3dMark 2001 se *

FX 5200   -------------------  5992   3d marks
Ti 4200    -------------------  11640 3d marks
Ti 4400    -------------------  12510 3d marks


*3d Mark 2003*

FX 5200   -------------------  692   3d marks
Ti 4200    -------------------  1733 3d marks 
Ti 4400    -------------------  1798 3d marks

See ti series has a good score even in 3D mark 2003 where not all tests ran (pixel shader , mother nature, etc)  then also the score is far better then the 5200 . i agree ti is a bit costly(so obvious) then 5200 but it is worth it.
 8)


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 27, 2004)

anidex said:
			
		

> The 5200 can run fragment shaders that the Ti can only dream of. All of the special effects like heat haze need a DX9 level card. So what if the FX 5200 can run the game decently only at 800x600? The Ti ain't gonna be able to come close to the FX 5200 visually anyway!



u r most probably lying anidex becoz the 5200 *cannot*  handle doom3 on  800x600 res decently on high settings. Man, i have seen doom3 on, fx5200 the game kills the card even on low res of 800x600 on high settings . ur right abt that cool heat haze effect but what is the point talking abt special effects if the card dosen't have enuf power to handle them   .


----------



## anidex (Sep 27, 2004)

> u r most probably lying anidex becoz the 5200 cannot handle doom3 on 800x600 res decently on high settings


Watch your tongue buddy.

The high setting in Doom 3 only uses uncompressed color maps. It doesn't introduce any new shaders. Anyway, you should only run the high setting on top mainstream cards like the 9500 Pro /5600 Ultra and above cards. You'd be a fool to run the game at high settings on an FX 5200 will such limited bandwidth.

Run the game at 800x600 at the medium setting and you'll be able to enjoy all the special effects, of course, with compressed color maps.


----------



## freshseasons (Sep 27, 2004)

I think tarey_g is right here ....!!!! the very reason i upgraded from 5200 Fx to 5700 Fx is my MSi FX5200 coudlnt handlt decent games at 800x600 ....actually when ever i turned on anyeffect i used to get 5 to 6 FPS helll...DAmn it !!!!!
  My geforce 3 was lot better than fx5200....At least it didint pretend to run Applealing visuals....when it cant ..
  Anyway setteled the issur for once and all with Gigabyte Fx5700...but still i suggest geforce 4 Ti is lot better than Fx5200...any day!!!!


----------



## pradeep_chauhan (Sep 27, 2004)

what does this Gigabyte Fx5700 cost?


----------



## blade_runner (Sep 27, 2004)

Mahender_Topgun its not advisable to go for a fx or even a Tio since Ti is a generation old card and Fx5200 doesnt have enuf juice. Better go for a  Radeon 9600 or a 9600pro for 6.8k and 8.5k respectively. Believe me u wont regret it.


----------



## pradeep_chauhan (Sep 27, 2004)

whatever little i read on the web it says that 5700 has a better bandwidth compared to a 9600. Will this not translate to a better performance tecnically?


----------



## anidex (Sep 28, 2004)

Technically yes, practically no. Check out the scores people got on the "The GRAPHICS CARDS List" for a good example of how badly the GeForce FX cards perform when put under extreme floating point math stress.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 28, 2004)

I agree with anidex on the performance of FX cards . better go for a ti


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 28, 2004)

Don't buy a plain 9600 (or even worse a 5700 pure), try getting a 9600XT. Higher bandwidth, transistor count, pixel processing capabilities are, at best, only indicative of a GPUs capabilites. Most of the time they are highly misleading. E.g. the FX5800 had higher bandwidth and transistor count than the Radeon 9700, but failed to beat it in most tests. At its best performance it was only able to equal the 9700.
So, if your budget does not permit a 9600XT, go for a Ti. I can personally attest to its great performance.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 28, 2004)

anidex said:
			
		

> Watch your tongue buddy.
> 
> The high setting in Doom 3 only uses uncompressed color maps. It doesn't introduce any new shaders. Anyway, you should only run the high setting on top mainstream cards like the 9500 Pro /5600 Ultra and above cards. You'd be a fool to run the game at high settings on an FX 5200 will such limited bandwidth.
> 
> Run the game at 800x600 at the medium setting and you'll be able to enjoy all the special effects, of course, with compressed color maps.


*so u ment to say   5200=compromise (low res,med settings)  *


and this  what i was trying to prove earlier  8) , seems like u agree now  , 
 


			
				anidex said:
			
		

> You'd be a fool to run the game at high settings on an FX 5200 will such limited bandwidth


.

and a ti is able to do this


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 28, 2004)

Anidex, I don't think that you have actually seen doom 3 on fx5200. I ran the default timedemo (demo1) at 800x600, High, Aniso forced off, no AA, filtering set to bileniar. Got a measely 6.47 FPS! My system (signature) got 25.1 FPS at 800x600, High, Aniso set to 2X, 2xQ AA, no optimization.
The only difference in I could see between the 2 cards was the heat haze effect, but with the amount of choppiness apparent on the fx, coupled with lack of AF and AA, just about everything looked hazey, lol.
Also, I noted something very peculiar. My friend's radeon 9200se, was running the game on low 640x480. It looked decent (choppy, but decent) enough. However, when I turned it to medium quality the textures looked like they had been bleached. I mean, no details visible! Ditto with turning on high quality. He had the latest drivers. I even tried fiddling with the CFG file. But everything was as it should be (image downsizing turned off, bump mapping turned etc.). Care to tell me what was happening?


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 28, 2004)

Pradeep, I have said it before and I am saying it again. Don't buy 5700 pure. Buy a 5700 ultra if you can get it cheap (get a good brand). Also don't buy a normal 9600, get a 9600XT if you get it cheap.
If your budget does not allow these, get a Ti, as it is superior to many 'newer' cards.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 28, 2004)

AlphaOmega said:
			
		

> Anidex, I don't think that you have actually seen doom 3 on fx5200.



I knew it . that's why i said .......



> u r most probably lying anidex becoz the 5200 cannot handle doom3 on 800x600 res decently on high settings


----------



## jerkthefragment (Sep 28, 2004)

> and a ti is able to do this


Didn't you get what this guy is trying to tell? Whoa Einstein, in case you didn't realize, the Ti isn't running any of the advanced shaders that the FX 5200 is. That's why the Ti 4200 performs better.

Compressed textures sacrifice a little quality over uncompressed ones, but loosing half the special effects is a huge compromise.

Seems to me that you're just trying to hoodwink someone into buying your Ti 4200. Well guys, my advice is that this chap is only trying to mislead you into buying his rotten Ti 4200, so save your 7000 bucks and go in for an FX 5700 or a Radeon 9600.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 28, 2004)

jerkthefragment said:
			
		

> > and a ti is able to do this
> 
> 
> Didn't you get what this guy is trying to tell? Whoa Einstein, in case you didn't realize, the Ti isn't running any of the advanced shaders that the FX 5200 is. That's why the Ti 4200 performs better.
> ...



think b4 u write something. we are talking here abt the 5200 and ti4200.
if u really want to experience the perks of Dx9 technology then 5200 is not a good choice, u will need at least a 5700(still weaker than my ti4200 128MB 275/550) and *5700 is lot more expensive than a ti4200*. 

I am aware of the Dx9 plus points but we are considering here budget too,
jerkthefrag u cant just recommend a 5700 when the budget is considerd . If only the performance and the advanced shaders is all u care about then i recommend the best 6800ultra ....go buy it.....

and u stop confusing other ppl .....


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 28, 2004)

Ok jerkTF, I can challange you to show me any difference between the Ti and FX5200 in terms of special effects, except the heat haze. Please know what you are talking about before saying something like 'loosing half the special effects'. Man, you are just shooting off!

And please refrain from accusations like 'hookwinking'. Yes, I am trying to sell my Ti. All I have said until now is true and it is meant to persuade someone to buy the Ti. I don't claim that the Ti is better than, say the 9600XT or the 5700 Ultra (though I find the latter a bit too expensive for the performance and features it offers). However, anyone who claims that the fx5200 (ultra or non-ultra) or the 5700 pure is in anyway faster or generally better than any of the Ti series, need to be institutionalized.


----------



## tarey_g (Sep 28, 2004)

and here is a small story for some ppl who don't understand things right way....
(just 4 fun, I mean no personal comments on anyone in this forum) 




There was a kid named Bholu . one day Bholu went to market to buy a underwear as he needed one ,he had 40 Rs in his pocket. on his way to the market he met his friend, his friend asked him "hey where r u going?" Bholu replied "I'm going to the market to buy *underwear with ventilation technology 8.1*". His friend said " Hey Bholu donâ€™t go for the old ventilation technology try the new *underwearâ€™s with ventilation technology 9.0* these are far better than the 8.1's."

Man, Bholu was glad   so both friends went to the shop together. First bholu asked for the underwear with ventilation technology 8.1 of his size ,the shopkeeper replied "40 Rs sir." , again bholu asked for the new underwear with ventilation technology 9.0 of his size , the shopkeeper replied "70 Rs only". *Bholu was shocked "70 rs*!!! its costly ". but his dumb friend had a wise suggestion  " hey bholu u can buy a underwear of smaller size with ventilation technology 9.0 and it will cost u 35 rs and you will save 5 rs too. compromise anything bholu but not the new ventilation technology 9.0!!!!!" .

Poor bholu on the suggestion of his friend bought a smaller sized underwear with ventilation technology 9.0 . *Pity......... he has to wear the small underwear for next few months with his butt and groin choked all the time. *
 
but like all other stories this story has a happy ending ....he bought lollypops with the 5 rs he saved. 




Bholu
*www.cqsb.qc.ca/hes/funny.gif

awwwwww..... every thing choked down there


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 29, 2004)

May be "bholu" can compromise by *cutting back*  . *OUCH!*
And t_g, the 9.0 ventilation system is much more advanced than the 8.1. _I should know !!_


----------



## freshseasons (Sep 29, 2004)

I think theres no point left  in this topic..i .mean check any site,..most of them say tough Fx5200 supports direct x 9 it doenst have the power to run 9 X  games ...then hell i ask Companies why give direct x 9 when the card is unable to run it in the first place...a Ti is hell a lot better...
  And moreever i have lost damn money on Fx 5200 , until i got Gigabyte 5700 Fx Ultra....and man its good for me....


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 29, 2004)

Yup, the FX5700 Ultra is better than the Ti. Infact, this card should have been the major card in the mid range segment, rather than the disappointing 5600.


----------



## AlphaOmega (Sep 30, 2004)

freshseasons, just out of curosity, how much did your current card cost you (final price)?


----------



## freshseasons (Oct 1, 2004)

AlphaOmega said:
			
		

> freshseasons, just out of curosity, how much did your current card cost you (final price)?


   Hello i got the card 6 months back at 11,800 Bucks ...the details are...as follows
Card : Gigabyte NVidia GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
Memory on card : 128 MB DDR ,DVI-I connector ,,
  Hope this helps u ...ofcourse the card will be damn cheap now....but preset price i dono any..


----------



## AlphaOmega (Oct 1, 2004)

Not a bad price for 6 months ago. What are your core and memory speeds.

Also, why don't you post some benchmark and game scores? I would like 3DMark 2001 and doom 3 (demo1) and far cry (benchemall). I have never actually seem a 5700 Ultra in action (I have seen a 5700 pure). If you do post the scores also tell me your sys config.

I can't wait for the scores :->


----------



## blade_runner (Oct 2, 2004)

freshseasons see this thread *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6532&start=0

and post ur benchmarks there too......


----------



## freshseasons (Oct 2, 2004)

Ok just give me 4 hours and i will post my benchmark there too...anyway ...think this will effect my benchmark...i just got an Athlon 2600XP ( Barton ) with Asus nforce 2 MOBO..and 512 MB Ram...I think My Processor will be the bottle neck but hell...i will post them whatever...Till then ..Tada


----------



## sahil170 (Oct 4, 2004)

Umm Discussion about a TI 4200 vs Fx 5200 eh. It should be a no show a ti 4200 is better then the fx 5600. AND all the talk of Sm 2.0 and DX 9.0 effects. Lets get it staright FX cards cannot handle Shaders period, look at any DX 9.0 game even an FX 5950 resorts to DX 8.1 settings. Basically the whole FX series is avoidable.


----------



## blade_runner (Oct 4, 2004)

sahil170 said:
			
		

> Lets get it staright FX cards cannot handle Shaders period, look at any DX 9.0 game even an FX 5950 resorts to DX 8.1 settings. Basically the whole FX series is avoidable.



Finally ppl who agree with me ..............


----------

