PDA

View Full Version : BEST CHOICE for ABIT BH6 -GeForce3 or Geforce4 ?


John F
January 14th 04, 10:49 PM
Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do AGP
2x to match my
motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend cause
in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard &
video card, and then I'll spend.
Choices are:
GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best peformance/dollar?)
GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
(More?)
-AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x AGP? -Thanks

PRIVATE1964
January 15th 04, 03:12 AM
I'd go with the 4200

DaveL
January 15th 04, 03:21 AM
I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I have
found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3. I
think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are you
running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit boards.

Dave


"John F" > wrote in message
...
> Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
> believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
> ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do AGP
> 2x to match my
> motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend
cause
> in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard &
> video card, and then I'll spend.
> Choices are:
> GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best peformance/dollar?)
> GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> (More?)
> -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
AGP? -Thanks
>
>

John F
January 15th 04, 05:18 AM
Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at 1.3Ghz
which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with 128MB
cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
Coppermine's .18


"DaveL" > wrote in message
...
> I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I have
> found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3. I
> think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are you
> running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit boards.
>
> Dave
>
>
> "John F" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
> > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
> > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do
AGP
> > 2x to match my
> > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend
> cause
> > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard &
> > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > Choices are:
> > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best peformance/dollar?)
> > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > (More?)
> > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> AGP? -Thanks
> >
> >
>

BelaLvgosi
January 15th 04, 02:22 PM
In a tb1333 from gf3ti200 (running at 175/500, since mems were 4ns) to a
4200 8x (standard 250/513) 6000 to 8000 3dmarks (2001se), but in actual
gameplay, I'm stuck with the same detail settings, it's not enough to raise
them (true reflections and full shadows), but frame rate is more constant
and better in dense zones. For the price difference, I think it's worth it.

"John F" > wrote in message
...
> Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at 1.3Ghz
> which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with 128MB
> cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
> except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
> Coppermine's .18
>
>
> "DaveL" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I
have
> > found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3. I
> > think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are
you
> > running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit
boards.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > "John F" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
> > > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
> > > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do
> AGP
> > > 2x to match my
> > > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend
> > cause
> > > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard
&
> > > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > > Choices are:
> > > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best
peformance/dollar?)
> > > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > > (More?)
> > > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> > AGP? -Thanks
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

DaveL
January 15th 04, 06:32 PM
Is that a Slot-T slotket?

Dave


"John F" > wrote in message
...
> Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at 1.3Ghz
> which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with 128MB
> cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
> except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
> Coppermine's .18
>
>
> "DaveL" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I
have
> > found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3. I
> > think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are
you
> > running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit
boards.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > "John F" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
> > > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
> > > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do
> AGP
> > > 2x to match my
> > > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend
> > cause
> > > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard
&
> > > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > > Choices are:
> > > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best
peformance/dollar?)
> > > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > > (More?)
> > > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> > AGP? -Thanks
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

John F
January 15th 04, 09:15 PM
yes

"DaveL" > wrote in message
...
> Is that a Slot-T slotket?
>
> Dave
>
>
> "John F" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at
1.3Ghz
> > which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with
128MB
> > cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
> > except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
> > Coppermine's .18
> >
> >
> > "DaveL" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I
> have
> > > found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3.
I
> > > think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are
> you
> > > running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit
> boards.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > "John F" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ?
I
> > > > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor
at
> > > > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to
do
> > AGP
> > > > 2x to match my
> > > > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to
spend
> > > cause
> > > > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole
thing -motherboard
> &
> > > > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > > > Choices are:
> > > > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > > > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > > > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best
> peformance/dollar?)
> > > > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > > > (More?)
> > > > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> > > AGP? -Thanks
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

NuT CrAcKeR
January 16th 04, 05:56 AM
KB... Not MB


"John F" > wrote in message
...
> Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at 1.3Ghz
> which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with 128MB
> cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
> except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
> Coppermine's .18
>
>
> "DaveL" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I
have
> > found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3. I
> > think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are
you
> > running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit
boards.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > "John F" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ? I
> > > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor at
> > > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to do
> AGP
> > > 2x to match my
> > > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to spend
> > cause
> > > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole thing -motherboard
&
> > > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > > Choices are:
> > > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best
peformance/dollar?)
> > > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > > (More?)
> > > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> > AGP? -Thanks
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>

John F
January 16th 04, 09:14 AM
oops :-)

"NuT CrAcKeR" > wrote in message
...
> KB... Not MB
>
>
> "John F" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Yes I'm using a slotket. And actually it's a Tualatin Celeron P3 at
1.3Ghz
> > which I'm overclocking at 1.456Ghz. Unlike the normal Celeron's with
128MB
> > cache, The Tualatin has 256MB cache giving it exact specs of the P3's,
> > except for the Tualatin's smaller (better) core of .13 instead of
> > Coppermine's .18
> >
> >
> > "DaveL" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I have an Abit ZM6 (very similar to the bh6) with a 1 gig Celeron. I
> have
> > > found that it is a good match with a GF3. But you have a 1.5 gig P3.
I
> > > think you would get better results with the GF4 ti4200. BTW, what are
> you
> > > running to get 1.5 gig? Slotket? I love that generation of Abit
> boards.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > "John F" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Which card is the best performance per dollar for my Abit BH6 v1.0 ?
I
> > > > believe it has AGP1x/2x at 3.3volts and I'm running a P3 processor
at
> > > > ~1.5Ghz. I've learned from you guys that the card has to be able to
do
> > AGP
> > > > 2x to match my
> > > > motherboard. This has to be a *budget* upgrade -I don't want to
spend
> > > cause
> > > > in a year or so I'm gonna have to upgrade the whole
thing -motherboard
> &
> > > > video card, and then I'll spend.
> > > > Choices are:
> > > > GeForce4 Ti4200 64Mb ~$60 on Ebay
> > > > GeForce3 ~$50 on Ebay
> > > > GeForce3 Ti200 ~$40 on Ebay (THis might be the best
> peformance/dollar?)
> > > > GeForce FX 5200 128Mb $55 on Pricewatch
> > > > (More?)
> > > > -AND of your choice, if you know, which brand goes down to 2x
> > > AGP? -Thanks
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

... et al.
January 17th 04, 12:43 AM
NuT CrAcKeR > wrote nothing besides:

> KB... Not MB

kB ... Not KB

[ or put differently, why is it that most people use just this (binary)
prefix with a different case to the normal use of decimal prefixes as
used throughout science as per the SI Unit Prefixes endorsed by the
International System of Units ? ]

--
Please followup in newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

NuT CrAcKeR
January 21st 04, 06:00 AM
No, KB for KiloBytes. The K and M are always capitalized. Its the ending
that confuses most people.

For example...

"I have a 1.5MB DSL connection"

This is obviously incorrect, as megabytes is not a quantity used to measure
bandwidth. The correct statement would be,

" I have a 1.5Mb DSL connection "
... as megabits are indeed a unit of measure used to quantify bandwidth.

I have no idea what a small k would be used for... perhaps the measure of
calories?

kC = kila-calories...

just a though.

NuTs



"... et al." > wrote in message
s.invalid...
> NuT CrAcKeR > wrote nothing besides:
>
> > KB... Not MB
>
> kB ... Not KB
>
> [ or put differently, why is it that most people use just this (binary)
> prefix with a different case to the normal use of decimal prefixes as
> used throughout science as per the SI Unit Prefixes endorsed by the
> International System of Units ? ]
>
> --
> Please followup in newsgroup.
> E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

... et al.
January 24th 04, 01:05 PM
NuT CrAcKeR > wrote:

> "... et al." > wrote in message
> s.invalid...
>
> > NuT CrAcKeR > wrote nothing besides:
> >
> > > KB... Not MB
> >
> > kB ... Not KB
> >
> > [ or put differently, why is it that most people use just this (binary)
> > prefix with a different case to the normal use of decimal prefixes as
> > used throughout science as per the SI Unit Prefixes endorsed by the
> > International System of Units ? ]
>
>
> No, KB for KiloBytes. The K and M are always capitalized. Its the ending
> that confuses most people.

Where are they always capitalized? Only in the computer-related fields!
Why there if nowhere else?

kilo is designated "k" when used as a prefix in SI units.
mega is designated "M" when used as a prefix in SI units.

While the unit designation (b vs. B) do confuse people because so many
writers doesn't know and/or care about the difference or they think the
meaning is given by the context, the use of nonstandard capitalization
of the prefix (only for Kilo, not for Mega etc) _should_ confuse people.
That was kinda the point of my post, while nitpicking on a nitpicker ;-)

>
> For example...
>
> "I have a 1.5MB DSL connection"
>
> This is obviously incorrect, as megabytes is not a quantity used to measure
> bandwidth. The correct statement would be,
>
> " I have a 1.5Mb DSL connection "
> .. as megabits are indeed a unit of measure used to quantify bandwidth.

Whether you should have a 1.5 megabyte (per second) or a 1.5 megabit
(per second) DSL connection is for you and your ISP to negotiate ;-)

>
> I have no idea what a small k would be used for... perhaps the measure of
> calories?
>
> kC = kila-calories...
>
> just a though.

Was that example choosen deliberately? You know the SI Unit for Energy
is joule (J), don't you? Calorie has been left by the wayside along with
erg, inch & pound et cetera, a long time ago.
For what small k _is_ used for look around the world (outside the
computerfield) at any unit whose amount is best given in kilo-<unit>.

--
Please followup in newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

J. Clarke
January 24th 04, 02:38 PM
.... et al. wrote:

> NuT CrAcKeR > wrote:
>
>> "... et al." > wrote in message
>> s.invalid...
>>
>> > NuT CrAcKeR > wrote nothing besides:
>> >
>> > > KB... Not MB
>> >
>> > kB ... Not KB
>> >
>> > [ or put differently, why is it that most people use just this (binary)
>> > prefix with a different case to the normal use of decimal prefixes as
>> > used throughout science as per the SI Unit Prefixes endorsed by the
>> > International System of Units ? ]
>>
>>
>> No, KB for KiloBytes. The K and M are always capitalized. Its the ending
>> that confuses most people.
>
> Where are they always capitalized? Only in the computer-related fields!
> Why there if nowhere else?
>
> kilo is designated "k" when used as a prefix in SI units.
> mega is designated "M" when used as a prefix in SI units.
>
> While the unit designation (b vs. B) do confuse people because so many
> writers doesn't know and/or care about the difference or they think the
> meaning is given by the context, the use of nonstandard capitalization
> of the prefix (only for Kilo, not for Mega etc) _should_ confuse people.
> That was kinda the point of my post, while nitpicking on a nitpicker ;-)
>
>>
>> For example...
>>
>> "I have a 1.5MB DSL connection"
>>
>> This is obviously incorrect, as megabytes is not a quantity used to
>> measure bandwidth. The correct statement would be,
>>
>> " I have a 1.5Mb DSL connection "
>> .. as megabits are indeed a unit of measure used to quantify bandwidth.
>
> Whether you should have a 1.5 megabyte (per second) or a 1.5 megabit
> (per second) DSL connection is for you and your ISP to negotiate ;-)
>
>>
>> I have no idea what a small k would be used for... perhaps the measure of
>> calories?
>>
>> kC = kila-calories...
>>
>> just a though.
>
> Was that example choosen deliberately? You know the SI Unit for Energy
> is joule (J), don't you? Calorie has been left by the wayside along with
> erg, inch & pound et cetera, a long time ago.
> For what small k _is_ used for look around the world (outside the
> computerfield) at any unit whose amount is best given in kilo-<unit>.

According to the NIST, "k" denotes decimal 10^3, while "Ki" denotes the
closest power of 2, 2^10 or decimal 1024. Perhaps that's the source of the
confusion?
>

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

... et al.
January 25th 04, 09:20 PM
J. Clarke wrote:

> .... et al. wrote:
>
>>NuT CrAcKeR > wrote:
>>
>>>"... et al." > wrote in message
s.invalid...
>>>
>>>
>>>>NuT CrAcKeR > wrote nothing besides:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>KB... Not MB
>>>>
>>>>kB ... Not KB
>>>>
>>>>[ or put differently, why is it that most people use just this (binary)
>>>>prefix with a different case to the normal use of decimal prefixes as
>>>>used throughout science as per the SI Unit Prefixes endorsed by the
>>>>International System of Units ? ]
>>>
>>>
>>>No, KB for KiloBytes. The K and M are always capitalized. Its the ending
>>>that confuses most people.
>>
>>Where are they always capitalized? Only in the computer-related fields!
>>Why there if nowhere else?
>>
>>kilo is designated "k" when used as a prefix in SI units.
>>mega is designated "M" when used as a prefix in SI units.
>>
>>While the unit designation (b vs. B) do confuse people because so many
>>writers doesn't know and/or care about the difference or they think the
>>meaning is given by the context, the use of nonstandard capitalization
>>of the prefix (only for Kilo, not for Mega etc) _should_ confuse people.
>>That was kinda the point of my post, while nitpicking on a nitpicker ;-)
>>

<snip>

>
> According to the NIST, "k" denotes decimal 10^3, while "Ki" denotes the
> closest power of 2, 2^10 or decimal 1024. Perhaps that's the source of the
> confusion?

kibi's, mebi's, and gibi's ...,
now that something you see all the time ... Not !
No, i really don't think that's it. We're missing the i's in KB and GB
and so on, at least i never see them.

Links for anyone curioius:
<http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/prefixes.html>
<http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html>

I just came to think that the reason might be that it's a remnant from
an earlier computer era (like FORTRAN, M$-DOS and such) where lower-case
letters hadn't been invented yet. Can that be it?

NIST? Something needed in parallel to ANSI? I had never heard of that
USoA institute before.

Ok, i'll stop flogging the dead horse now ..., this really has nothing
to do with Nvidia videocards, now is it?

--
Please followup in newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.