Sign in to follow this  
Martin Georg EDDF

32MB GeForce256DDR vs. 64MB GeForce4 4200ti

Recommended Posts

I am thinking about upgrading my videocard to a 64MB GeForce4 4200ti from the 32MB GeForce256DDR. What kind of performance increases should I see. I don't expect to me much, if any, in terms of the frame rates, but I do expect to see some performance increase in terms of visual quality. If you have upgraded to a GeForce4 from an older card such as the GeForce256 card, what kind of improvement have you seen with FS2002?Thanks in advance,Robbie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Wow, well you should see MUCH better framerates IMHO upgrading to a GF4 over a GF256. I upgraded to a GF4 Ti4200 from an ATI 7500 and saw about double the framerates at LAX with full AI traffic. With the 7500 I estimate I was dropping down into the 5-7 FPS range (which was a real slideshow) on approach to LAX running 1024x768 with the sliders turned down and full AI traffic. With the Ti4200 I stay probably around 16+ on approach with the settings turned up along with 4x Anti Aliasing and full AI traffic. Quite smooth now.I'd expect you'd even see more than that going from a first gen Geforce as the Radeon 7500 ranks between the GF2 and GF3 in terms of performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mistake, sorry. Using Athlon 2000+, 512mb DDR RAM, Geforce 4 Ti4200 128mb.The low FPS with the ATI were actually with an old Athlon 800 proc now that I remember. With the new proc they were a bit higher, but still in the stutter range...probably around 10 FPS. With the new video card they are actually probably about 20-23 FPS when in the 2D cockpit and 16-20 when in spot view panning around the plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for you help.From eveything I have read, there's not supposed to be much in terms of frame rates from one card to another because FS2002 is so CPU bound. I wonder how much of your framerate improvement might have been due to the Athlon 2000XP sending information too quickly for the older card to handle rather than the new card being the cause for the increased performance in terms of CPU. If this is the case, you probably would have seen little improvement in you'd have plugged in the 4200ti into the old computer. Are you using the 128 or the 64MB version of the card?Thanks,ROb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using the 128mb version...While you are correct that video card to video card you won't see much gain, that's within reason. Between an origional Geforce (which is OLD in computer hardware lifespans) and a GF4 you will notice a big difference. Plus, the GF4 will give you reflective textures and other effects like that. Will be able to draw many more polygons on the screen and much faster. Ultimately your CPU will limit you, but I think you will see a big gain upgrading.JMHO of course, YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, I upgraded from a GF2MX 32 Meg to a GF4Ti4200 128 Meg.I was expecting little if any FPS change, but was pleasantly surprised..The FPS are up noticeably, and are much more stable even when adding clouds, night lighting etc..The visual range is improved.. I can see landscapes further outI can now run at higher resolutions with AA enabled (switched from 1024x768x16 20fps to 1280x960x32 24 fps as my standard)Add to that reflections etc and this is a whole new sim!My specs: Celeron1000, 384 Meg RAM.BTW... CFS2 framerates are now in the 50+ range..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input. I noticed, however, that on Tomshardware.com, the Geforce256 DDR is almost twice as fast as the Geforce2 MX card. However, thanks for the insight. I am still a little reluctant to upgrade:My current system:Athlon 1.2Ghz512Mb PC133 SDRAM32MB GeForce256DDRMaxtor 30G 7200RPM HDThanks again!Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I will stick with my current card for a few more months until something compelling comes out.Thanks,Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I am thinking about upgrading my videocard to a 64MB >GeForce4 4200ti from the 32MB GeForce256DDR. What kind of >performance increases should I see. I don't expect to me >much, if any, in terms of the frame rates, but I do expect >to see some performance increase in terms of visual quality. > If you have upgraded to a GeForce4 from an older card such >as the GeForce256 card, what kind of improvement have you >seen with FS2002? >>Thanks in advance, >>Robbie Hi RobI just upgraded from a Creative 3d blaster Geforce256 32mb ddr pro to a leadtek Geforce3 ti200.I find that 2002 pro runs along just fine now though I have not loaded that many scenery files.My test was the hong kong at dawn flight, with the geforce256 the frame rate could get down to about 10fpsThe frame rate increase was about 10-15fps with most of the sliders up full. it now hovers from 15-30fpsMy system is a AMD 1700xp Asus 266 ddr mobo 512ddr ram 40gb 7200 HD I was pleased with the results, I would think the geforce 4 would get better, but not much more if you went for the mx versions.1mmc:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robbie,I would strongly suggest to upgrade the video card. You wil not see fps under normal conditions to RISE, but they will stay significantly higher when conditions get worse (especially bad weather, lots of cloud layers, thick cloud layers etc.). Also the 4200i does not have the performance drop with resolutions above 1024*768, which the older cards have.Yours,Martin Georg/EDDFTeamchef Eurowings VAmailto:teamchef@ewgva.dehttp://home.t-online.de/home/martin_georg/pictures/EW_MG.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>My system is a AMD 1700xp Asus 266 ddr mobo 512ddr ram 40gb >7200 HD >I was pleased with the results, I would think the geforce 4 >would get better, but not much more if you went for the mx >versions.Right, just to emphasize his point - the GeForce4 MX series (420, 440, 460) sports a warmed-over GeForce2 chipset that performs WORSE than the GeForce3 series cards (Ti200, Ti500). GeForce4 Titanium (Ti) series (4200, 4400, 4600) are the performance leaders, unfortunately with a hefty price tag. Since the original thread author mentioned Tom's Hardware, let me add an URL for a great article from last April which compared all the available graphics cards running some "standard" gaming applications: http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2...acharts-05.htmlI recently upgraded my GF3Ti200 to a GF4Ti4200 but recommend either of them highly. GF3Ti200 offers incredible fps for the buck, and GF4Ti4200 is the best price/performance option in the GeForce4 Titanium series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this