Will the day come when 20k marks on a ti4200 becomes easy?

[EMunEeE]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
I consider it a draw:

1. you own me in 2003, especially with fsaa, but then that benchmark is a dx9 one, its not an apples comparsion. Youd probably own me in dx9 games in a few years when they come out.
2. your 256 bit bandwith helps heaps with fsaa but without fsaa I would own j00! and I dont use fsaa either
3. many games are cpu intensive so I own you in 1024x768 and below without fsaa while you own me above that, but who cares when you get 20fps at 1600x1200 while I get 60fps at 800x600 :p
4. im aiming for 14500 marks, eating you by 900 marks. Your cpu will hold you very badly. Your max fps will remain low at any res while my max fps will be low only at high res

1. You damn right I own you in 3D Mark 2003. If we just compared the DX7 and DX8 tests, I would still own you as there is only DX9 game test. :p

2. and your FSB helps heaps with your 3D Mark score. Lower your FSB to my level and lets see who gets their @ss beat. :p

3. What about 1280x1024?:p (I'll get more FPS in that than you'll get in 800x600

4. my max FPS will be low at YOUR resolutions. As I raise it it will be higher and higher and take less of a hit with every notch i increase it :p

Face it son, you are a 3D Mark freak...lets see who can run Half Life 2 better in September...then you can talk to me:p :D :cool: :afro2:

[Geforce4ti4200]

1. ok you win there
2. ill run 133fsb and id still break 11k marks, I broke 11k on an xp1600 at 150fsb, my xp2000 stock should break 11k
3. ok you are on. what game or benchy do you want to run? see if you can eat me, ill run 800x600, you run 1280x1024. NO fsaa either! if you eat me, I can tell everyone I was wrong and you owned me :eek: what I am betting is your slow cpu wont have the power to push alot of fps at any res, basically your fps will be the same no matter what res you ran, this happened when I had a slower cpu
4. if your max fps at 640x480 is 30, your max may be 28fps at 1600x1200 while my max may be 50 at 640x480 and 10 at 1600x1200. get the point? youll never have more than 30fps while I will at the expense of resolution. point being, is 1600x1200 worth $450 when my $64 card does 800x600? sure games will look nicer for you while Ill be buying more games and a faster cpu :)

[poursoul]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200

4. if your max fps at 640x480 is 30, your max may be 28fps at 1600x1200 while my max may be 50 at 640x480 and 10 at 1600x1200. get the point? youll never have more than 30fps while I will at the expense of resolution. point being, is 1600x1200 worth $450 when my $64 card does 800x600? sure games will look nicer for you while Ill be buying more games and a faster cpu :)

\Runs screaming bloody murder - AAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

/Comes back

you don't have the slightest clue do you? go ask you friend if you have a clue.

BTW: Radeon 9700 Pro price (http://www.pricewatch.com/1/37/4884-1.htm) and GF4 Ti 4200 price (http://www.pricewatch.com/1/37/4913-1.htm).

You are way off.

P.S. i don't like you. you flap your gums too much.

[The Baron]

P.S. i don't like you. you flap your gums too much.
But aren't you the one that eats people? ;)

[poursoul]

;)

[Geforce4ti4200]

dude I was comparing the fx5900u he has against my ti4200 I bought. and I paid $64 for mine used on ebay, he probably paid at least $450 for his. like I said, his card is tons faster but his cpu cant keep up in low res. The world fastest card wont matter much when your fps arent enough to be smooth, games like fast cpus too. anyway I am aiming for 14500 marks on my ti4200 I spent $64 for :)

[EMunEeE]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
dude I was comparing the fx5900u he has against my ti4200 I bought. and I paid $64 for mine used on ebay, he probably paid at least $450 for his. like I said, his card is tons faster but his cpu cant keep up in low res. The world fastest card wont matter much when your fps arent enough to be smooth, games like fast cpus too. anyway I am aiming for 14500 marks on my ti4200 I spent $64 for :)

The question is will you get fancy shader effects in DX9-capable games (aka HL2) :p ???

[Geforce4ti4200]

Originally posted by $E Mun$
The question is will you get fancy shader effects in DX9-capable games (aka HL2) :p ???


eh probably not, I could get an fx5200 cheap by the time hl2 comes out, perhaps $50 for one and compare the differences. Is it worth playing 800x600 to get dx9 features or 1280x960 instead on a ti4200? I doubt there will be much of a visual loss for now, itll be a while before dx9 becomes required anyway

[EMunEeE]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
eh probably not, I could get an fx5200 cheap by the time hl2 comes out, perhaps $50 for one and compare the differences. Is it worth playing 800x600 to get dx9 features or 1280x960 instead on a ti4200? I doubt there will be much of a visual loss for now, itll be a while before dx9 becomes required anyway

You can TRY and get a 5200 working. And there will be a visual loss in case you dont think so...check out Maximum PC's article. :D
http://www.hanners.nildram.co.uk/hl2/

[Geforce4ti4200]

so the fx5200(u) wont be any better than a ti4200 visually for dx9 games? well I may get the fx5200 when it drops to $30 just so I can collect video cards while my ti4200 will be actually used

[Lostlilchild6]

Tbird... you are wrong!!!



Dude... face it! Your computer sucks! What is it with you? Do you like going from forum to forum pissing people off?!??! Gawwwd.. what is wrong with you? You just like to start arguments and stuff :(. You dont like tobe told you're wrong... even though 98.8473% of the time.. you are.



You cannot compare a 9700PRO with a TI4200 you freakin looney!!!!



I've told you a THOUSAND times! I went from a TI4600 to a 9700PRO... and the performance increase was phenomenal! You said it yourself.. you will be buying a 9700PRO in 2007 when they're worth 50 bucks... and your gonna go for 25k 3dmarks. I remember when you said that.. you are soooo freakin... ugh.


You need to get a life dude... honestly. Start using your comptuer for what it was designed for. A computer was definately not designed to run 3dmark all freakin day. I could understand if you had a bitchin score, it would justify all your 3dmark ranting... but you dont. Nothing about your setup is impressive.




Guys... this is what this guy is about. Even after this rant, he will still continue to post his crap.... I just dont think it's right. Imagine all the poeple around here that read the forums to LEARN! What are they going to think when they see this guy talk this rubbish? :rolleyes: :(

[The Baron]

Everything you say is true, Lost. Thank you for saying it. :)

[Daneel Olivaw]

And then Daneel swoops in with his great MSI Ti4200

Ti4200 15300 3dmarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7190570

FX5700 12500 3dmarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7441751

[-=DVS=-]

Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200

"Why would you use Ti4200 on a brand new 5Ghz Intel Pentium"

to run games at blistering fps, silly :D


"By the time we have 5Ghz CPU's video cards will be 5x times faster then Ti4200"

show me a video card thatll get 5 times the 15k my ti4200 will get, thats 75k marks dude........


my friend says somethings wrong with your rig cause you cant break 14k on an oced 9700 pro :confused:


Was that 9700Pro comment to me becouse nothing is overcloaked in my rig.
I don't even know how many marks i get i don't play 3dmark :D

And "to run games at blistering fps, silly :D" your sound silly now cose even if Ti4200 would get 20k marks in benchmark by the time all games would be DX9 and it would not run bliztering fast at all only new cards would be and they would be atleast 5x if not more faster in those games :cool:

[ragejg]

dvs knows how old this thread is, right? :p:p

[-=DVS=-]

Originally posted by ragejg
dvs knows how old this thread is, right? :p:p

:D somehow i missed it and it got covered by all the other threads :p my bad.

[ragejg]

///ROFL/// :p

[Kamel]

i've gotten a score of 17,450 and i didn't even push to the limit... not at all.

i could probably get to 18K or 19K, but i really don't see a point in doing that JUST to say you have a nice 3dmark score. if i can play enemy territory with everything maxed out and the resolution 1024x1280, and never have it go under 76FPS (the magic number), then i'm very happy. putting my hardware in harms way for this is kinda stupid IMO.

[jAkUp]

lol this is the most retarded thread ever most games are GPU limited... the more effects a game has, the more demanding its gonna be on your video card. Doom, FarCry, HL2, those are all very video intesive. Why do you think a 5900 is soo much better for gaming than a 5200??? Because its a faster video card. Not to mention a 4200 is a DX8 card.

[poursoul]

i posted here.