9200SE or MX440?

vbimport

#1

I’ve been looking all over the place and have not yet been able to find any head-to-head benchmarks on these two video cards :frowning:

Radeon 9200SE 8x 128MB
Geforce4 MX440 8x 64MB

I originally though the 9200SE would be better… but looking at the clock speeds it is no longer so apparent…

9200SE 200MHz/400MHz
MX440 (8x) 275MHz/500MHz

I know that the extra 64MB of memory is basically worthless on such a ‘slow’ card so I don’t think it is a big factor…

Which one would you buy (if you had to) and why?
It’s for a friend who is a VERY modest budget and both will beat his current VIA Unicrome onboard video crap so don’t go saying “neither, they both suck” :stuck_out_tongue:

Thanks in advance for any advice.

(I know this may be coming so I’ll say right now that I can’t get a FX5200, they are $30-40 more then the above cards)


#2

What will this card be used for? If it’s for desktop use, I’d stick with the ATi as the image quality is way better. The NVidia will most likely give some better 3D performance (although I’m not too sure about that either, I’ll do some research tomorrow if nessecary).


#3

For games and desktop use.

I know there are many better solutions out there but like I said, this is replacing the onboard crap he has now and will indeed be a marked improvement. I’ve tried to talk him into spending another $50 but it’s apparently just not possible.

I’ve looked all over the net and have yet been able to find any head-to-head comparison’s. I’m normally quite good at this kind of thing, but the choice between the two cards has me stumped.

Any advice at all will be greatly appreciated.

Perhaps it may come down to over clocking potential.
I have to know in about 32 hours as that is when he will be going to buy the card.

Thanks again!

Edit: It looks like the 9200SE is bios is locked so nover oc’ing. But I have yet to find how well the MX440 will oc.


#4

If you can find a 9000pro this would be a good alternative to the 9200SE. I bought mine a month ago for about $70 australian. 9000 series performs better than the 9200.


#5

I have a Gigabyte ATI Radeon 9200SE 128MB and it works great, even with Call of Duty with max details. Plus ATI drivers are much more stable than nVIDIA ones. I couldn’t get the OpenGL to work with the latest nVIDIA drivers with my old Riva TNT graphics card, I had to downgrade to an older version. But the latest ATI Catalyst drivers work for me flawlessly.


#6

Lvsitano would it be possible to list you system specs and a 3D Mark 2001SE benchmark? I know that it’s a half ass decent card (again compared to onboard) but I don’t know if it’s faster then the MX440

:frowning:

Edit:
I found this review of a motherboard with onboard MX440 and it whips the 9200SE!
I can only imagine now that a dedicated 8x MX440 will beat it even better.

Take a look and let me know what you think:
http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=171&p=445

Now if everyone agrees that I should get the MX440 can you help me pick between these two (they are same price).

Pandex Geforce4 MX440-8X 64MB DDR w/ TV-Out
MSI G4 MX440-T8X 64MB w/ TV-Out

The Pandex is a lesser known name but has a fan on it. The MSI just has a heat sink. I think the fan may be important because it’s going into a Micro Mini tower… plus if want to oc it a bit I should have more success?


#7

I have a MSI GF440 (not the model you’re interested in) and it doesn’t have a fan but it has run stable for the last year and a half. Can’t complain about PQ either.

Also if you go for the ATI card a 9200 non-SE is faster than the SE version.


#8

Originally posted by Donald_Duck
Also if you go for the ATI card a 9200 non-SE is faster than the SE version.

But also more expensive…


#9

Exactly. It’s one of these two or he sticks with onboard.
I got him to get the MX440. I know it will play all games out there now so I’m not worried about games 6 months from now and neither is he atm. :smiley:


#10

Even though a GF4 MX440 only has hardware support for DirectX 7 features will it be able to run DirectX 9 based games? (don’t worry I am already aware of the pretty slideshow I will probably see) I know that you can play DirectX 8 game fine.
I just would like to know if a slower card such as the 9200SE that supports DirectX 8 would be better prepared to play a DirectX 9 game.


#11

probably depends on the game, check minimum requirements most games just disable DX9 effects if the card can’t handle them but it’s possible that some may refuse to work.

I got the DOOM III alpha leak to run on my GF440 (dunno if it uses DX9)
Some other games that run fine are

GTA3
GTA VC
Max payne 2
Freelancer
Neverwinter Nights

don’t know about dx9 there either but they run in a decent resolution with some eye-candy enabled without slowing down too mutch

(P4 2.4 512meg of ram)


#12

Yes AFAIK DoomIII uses DirectX 9.

Good to hear :bigsmile:


#13

Originally posted by Donald_Duck

Also if you go for the ATI card a 9200 non-SE is faster than the SE version.

what is SE ?


#14

any differences between heatsink and a fan in graphics card and other computer components .

as far as i know , both the terms are just the same .


#15

The 9200SE is a horribly crippled version of the 9200. It has a lower clock speed as well and probably more imporantly only uses 64bit memory as apposed to 128bit.

FYI:
Out of curiosity I benched the 9200SE on his comp before we’re going to return is and it only got 3600 on 3D Mark 2001SE 1024x768. His oboard 32MG shared Unicrome gets 1500 so it is better but not by enough.
Looking around at benchmarks I would guess the MX440 will get around 7000, much much better then the 9200SE by far. For cheaper even :slight_smile:

Oh and his system btw is
Athlon 2600+
512 PC2700
Gigabyte GA-7VM400M-P mobo
80GB Maxtor 7200 HD


#16

SE=commonly referred to as Shitty Edition :Z :bigsmile:


#17

So to sum it up.

2001SE benchmarks on the exact same system. Same OS settings etc etc. 1024x768 32bit

Onboard Via Unicrome 32MB Shared
1510

Saphire Radeon 9200SE 128MB DDR 8x
3702

Pandex Geforce4 MX440 64MB DDR 8x
6041

I’m glad I looked into it further. Even saved myself $10 in the process. The framerates look much nicer on the MX440 compared to the 9200SE (don’t even get me started on the onboard) and I did not see the FPS dip below 30 on any of the game tests in 3DMark, even the high detail ones (of course the MX440 is only DX7 so I could not run nature test).
Now to take a look at the overclocking potential of the MX440 and push a few more hundred points.


#18

So I just got a Pandex GF4 MX440-8x. On the online description from where I bought it it says that it’s supposed to run at 275MHz core and 500MHz (250DDR) memory.

Problem is when I installed coolbits I was surprised to see the memory clock sitting at 332MHz…

Here is a picture of how high I was able to oc without artifacts.

That is pretty crappy as I thought all 8x MX440’s were 275/500 ! :frowning: