Big Little Sister – The GeForce4 Ti4200 – THG.RU

Introduction

A good two months ago, NVIDIA unveiled its GeForce4 line of graphics chips. This fourth generation of the GeForce family is divided into two product lines, each containing three cards, which cover the entire performance spectrum from entry level to the very high end. On the one hand we have the budget GeForce4 MX line, which is based on an optimized GeForce2 core and lacks the newer 3D technology. It encompasses the 420, 440 and 460 models. On the other, there is the GeForce4 Ti series, represented by the 4200, 4400 and 4600 cards, offering the newest technology and consequently carrying a higher price tag.

Speaking of prices – there is a certain degree of overlap between the MX460 and the Ti4200. This made the Ti4200 seem like a very attractive choice from the very beginning, as it offered a theretofore unheard of price/performance ratio. Other than the initial launch information and the preliminary specifications, not much was heard about this card for a while. Not a single company had a product with this chip in the pipeline, and many PR managers knew no more of this chip than what had already been reported.

Naturally, this led to wild speculations and odd rumors based on the information available mixed with just a little (or a lot, in some cases) creative thinking. The most interesting rumors spoke of a complete cancellation of the Ti4200. Another claimed that NVIDIA simply couldn’t satisfy the expected high demand for such an attractive card and was therefore delaying it. Lastly there was talk of giving retailers a chance to sell off the remaining inventory of GeForce3 Ti200 cards, which would become obsolete with the introduction of the Ti4200, a card that would offer more performance at a similar, or even lower, price. Of course, the truth probably lies somewhere in between.

Specifications

Finally, all nay-sayers and doubters can be silenced: NVIDIA is definitely going to produce the Ti4200, and moreover, we can expect to see retail cards on the shelves by the end of April! The six-layer board of the Ti4200 looks very different from that of its siblings Ti4400 and Ti4600. Instead of using a long PCB with its impressive array of power supply components and transformers, the Ti4200 chip will reside on a shorter board with many fewer components. At a glance, one might even mistake it for a GeForce3 board.

The clock speeds quoted in our GeForce4 launch article (PC Graphics Beyond XBOX – NVIDIA Introduces GeForce4) are no longer up-to-date. NVIDIA will run the model we are testing here, the $199 128MB version, which will sell for $199, at a core speed of 250MHz and a memory speed of 222MHz (444MHz DDR). The 128Bit DDR SDRAM modules feature an access time of 4ns, which seems a bit low for the specified frequencies. Perhaps NVIDIA will change these specifications, though. The 64MB versions will run at a higher memory speed (250MHz, or 500MHZ DDR) and will cost only $179. At this point, no other details are available regarding this board, for example, whether the RAM will also use the new BGA format, like the other Ti models, or if there might also be an SDRAM version.

Aside from the lower clock speeds and the changed layout, there are no differences between the Ti4200 and the other Ti models. This makes the 4200 a full-fledged GeForce4 Ti, including full multi-monitor support (two integrated RAMDACs) and the trademark dual vertex shaders of the GeForce4 Ti. You can find more information on the technology behind the Ti chips here

Drivers

New products always require a new set of drivers. It seems as though the two heavyweights of the consumer graphics market, ATi and NVIDIA, are tweaking their drivers more for a higher 3DMark score than for stability and compatibility. Although we used the most current driver release for Windows XP from each company (ATi: 6037; NV: 28.32), products from each competitor produced some visual glitches.

Here are a few examples of what errors some of the cards produced. The screenshots were taken in the games Aquanox and Comanche 4, two modern games that we use as benchmarks in our testing labs.

ATi Radeon 7500

Rendering errors and incorrect colors on reflective surfaces (Comanche 4 in DX7 mode).

ATi Radeon 8500

Missing textures on the jump ship (Aquanox).

NVIDIA GeForce4 MX

Incorrectly displayed menu – only on the GeForce4 MX series (Aquanox).

Rendering errors such as these should never make it past driver testing, and should definitely not pop up in an officially released driver.

If you come across similar rendering problems on the Radeon 7500/8500 or the GeForce4 with current drivers, we would appreciate it if you would let us know. Just send a short email to lars@tomshardware.com. Don’t forget to include the exact model name of your card, the driver revision and operating system you were using, the name of the game, at what point the error showed up, and, if possible, a (compressed) screenshot.

Test Setup

NVIDIA sent us a pre-production sample board of the GeForce4 Ti4200 with 128MB of RAM. Originally, this board was clocked at 250/230 (460) MHz. After flashing to the newer BIOS we received from NVIDIA, the memory clock speed was reduced to 222 (444) MHz.

Currently, the 64MB versions with their faster memory speeds of 250 (500) MHz are still unavailable. While a simulation of such a board is theoretically possible, it is hard to tell how big an impact memory size actually has on testing results. Our results from the GeForce3 Ti200 comparison (64MB vs. 128MB cards) do not necessarily hold true for the GeForce4 series.

Nonetheless, we simulated a “smaller” GeForce4 Ti4200 by overclocking the memory of our 128MB board to 250 (500) MHz. The results attained in such a configuration are not necessarily representative of the performance of a “real” 64MB Ti4200, and should therefore be seen only as a preliminary indication. We will only be able to post any final results once we have actually had some 64MB cards to test.

All tests were run on an ASUS A7V266-E mainboard (VIA KT 266A) with an AMD Athlon XP 2000+ processor.

Benchmarks

Max Payne

* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.

NVIDIA’s drivers do an outstanding job in Max Payne. ATi’s boards tag along at a fair distance behind the NVIDIA group. The gap between the Radeon 8500 and the GeForce3 Ti series only begins to close staring at 1600×1200. The GeForce4 MX cards are close on the heels of the Radeon 8500. The GeForce4 TI boards, meanwhile, are in a class of their own. Even the Ti4200 is positioned quite comfortably ahead of the GeForce3 Ti500.

Aquanox

* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.

GeForce3 and Radeon 8500 are much closer together in Aquanox. The GeForce4 MX and Radeon 7500 cards also perform very similarly. Once again, the GeForce4 Ti boards are uncontested in their leadership.

Comanche 4

* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.

The newest game in our benchmarks suite, Comanche 4, proves to be very CPU dependent. Results for all boards are on a comparable level. Once the game runs at high resolution, however, we see the group draw apart according to their performance, and the differences between the boards become apparent. Despite large theoretical performance differences, the GeForce4 Ti cards still form a very close group.

There seems to be another bug in ATi’s Radeon 8500 driver. For some reason, the 64MB card’s performance drops noticeably at 1600×1200. The slower 128MB version suddenly seems to be at an advantage in other resolutions as well, a phenomenon that seems to be limited to this game.

Quake 3

* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.

Quake 3 makes one point abundantly clear: current video cards offer more than enough performance for a game from this generation. Nonetheless – the GeForce4 Ti boards once again grab the laurel wreath.

3D Mark 2001

* 64MB version simulated with a 128MB card. Results published with reservations.

Often times, theory and practice are worlds apart. The same apparently holds true for 3D Mark 2001, as the figures don’t mirror our previous gaming results. The ATI cards especially cut a better figure here than they do in the real-world games. In 1600×1200, both the GeForce3 Ti500 and the Radeon 8500 come within 500 points of the GeForce4 Ti4200. At lower resolutions, this distance increases to well over 1000 points.

FSAA Benchmarks

All NVIDIA GeForce4 cards, both of the MX and the Ti lines, possess new hardware functions that allow for much higher performance when using anti aliasing. The new 6x mode for Direct 3D is only available for these cards, as well.

In Quake 3, the GeForce4 Ti4600 using 2xFsaa or Quincunx is approximately as fast as a GeForce3 Ti500 in normal mode, i.e., without anti aliasing enabled! The Ti4200 can still reach GeForce3 Ti200 levels. Max Payne offered a similar picture.

If you’re looking for maximum FSAA power, then no other card can hold a candle to the GeForce4 Ti series. FSAA is a very memory intensive task. Therefore “simulating” a 64MB Ti4200 card with the 128MB card at hand by increasing its clock speed would not yield realistic results.

CPU scaling

In order to get a view of the scaling behaviour of the card, we ran some benchmarks on a slower PC with Athlon 1200 MHz and 256 MB PC-133.

In Quake 3 and Max Payne, all cards showed a significant performance increase when used with a faster CPU. Aquanox, however, uses the pixel and vertex shaders provided, which means that it is less dependent on the CPU.

Overclocking

As we have already pointed out in previous articles, overclocking tests with pre-production samples do not necessarily give us an indication of what to expect from the final shipping product. We have nonetheless included an overclocking test for the sake of completeness. Our sample was able to reach 310/550 MHz. As a reminder, the standard speeds are 250/444 MHz.

The final shipping cards will probably not offer this high level overclockability. Reaching GeForce4 Ti4400 levels (275/550) shouldn’t be a problem for cards with faster memory, however.

Conclusion

With the GeForce4 Ti4200, NVIDIA has thrown the gauntlet at the feet of the competition. For $199, consumers will get a card that is second only to the other members of the GeForce4 Ti line. It leaves both, the more expensive GeForce3 Ti500 and the ATi 8500, in the dust. When using FSAA, the card can even extend this lead. Finally, the card seems to offer great overclocking capabilities – at least our review sample did.

Competition, as they say, is good for the consumer. We are eagerly awaiting ATi’s answer to this challenge. The downside to the wealth of cards that is currently available is that it’s hard for the interested buyer to keep all of the cards and product lines straight. The best example is the GeForce4 MX 460, whose right to exist is basically called into question by the Ti4200. Even if prices for GeForce4 MX based cards were to drop even further, a consumer buying an MX 460 is making a poor choice – for the same price you could get the Ti4200, a card that is often twice as fast. (Recommended sales prices according to NVIDIA: GeForce4 MX 460: $179; Ti4200 64MB: $179; Ti4200 128MB: $199.)

Obviously, a good hard look at benchmark tables and price lists should be well worth your time! Otherwise, how would one make an informed and intelligent buying decision? What about ATi, you ask? The Radeon 8500 is selling for as low as $150 in the US – please note, these are street prices, not recommended sales prices. (Quick reminder: at its introduction in November, ATi still recommended a retail price of $299 for the Radeon 8500!!!)

ATi is not just sitting on their collective thumbs, though. The next generation of cards is already being prepared for launch. As always, the video card arena remains an exciting arena. With its GeForce4 Ti4200, NVIDIA currently has the most attractive offer on the shelves, by far.