All the cards, except the Albatron's one, are equipped with the Philips 7114 codec controlling VIVO: 

The Albatron's card has no external codec and TV-out is supported by the GeForce4 MX 440. 

As you know, Leadtek produces the TDH (TH) series which supports hardware monitoring. Some time ago we dealt with some cards coming with this function. It monitors the temperature of the card and a speed of rotation of the fan of the chip's cooler. There are LEDs on the card which notify about overheating and AGP 8x mode activation. The monitoring works via the WinFox II utility which comes with the card on a CD with drivers. 

Gainward supplies with its card the ExpertTool utility which makes adjustments for 2D simpler and also incorporates an overclocker. With this utility you can set the Enhanced Mode, i.e. set the frequencies of 300/300 (600) MHz. And you don't need any utilities to set 300/512 MHz forthe Albatron's card.  

Now it's time to estimate the boxes and their "insides". 
 

As expected: the faster the memory, the higher the overclocking potential. And I must note that the Gainward GeForce4 PowerPack Pro/600-8X XP Golden Sample and Albatron GeForce4 MX480 have an extremely high potential.

Note:

• in course of overclocking you must provide additional cooling, in particular, for the card (first of all, for its memory):

 



• overclocking depends on a definite sample, and you shouldn't generalize the results of one card to all video cards of this mark or series. The overclocking results are not the obligatory characteristics of a video card. 

Test system and drivers

Testbed: 

• Pentium 4 2530 MHz based getup: 
• Intel Pentium 4 2530 MHz; 
• ASUS P4T533 (i850E) mainboard; 
• 512 MB 32bit RDRAM PC4200; 
• Seagate Barracuda IV 40GB HDD; 
• Windows XP. 
• Athlon XP 2000+ based getup: 
• AMD Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz); 
• Soltek 75DRV5 (VIA KT333) mainboard; 
• 512 MB DDR SDRAM PC2700; 
• Seagate Barracuda IV 40GB HDD. 

In the tests we used NVIDIA's drivers of v40.72. VSync was off, S3TC was off.

Test results

Before we start examining 2D quality I should say that there is no a complete technique of objective estimation of this parameter because: 

1. Almost all modern 3D accelerators can have 2D quality much dependent on a certain sample, and it's impossible to trace all cards; 
2. 2D quality depends not only on a video card, but also on a monitor and a cable; 
3. Besides, certain monitors do not get along with certain video cards. 

As for the tested samples, together with the ViewSonic P817 monitor and BNC Bargo cable the cards showed excellent quality at the following resolutions and frequencies:

• Albatron GeForce4 MX480: 1280x1024x120Hz, 1600x1200x75Hz; 
• Leadtek WinFast A180 DDR TH MyVIVO: 1280x1024x100Hz, 1600x1200x75Hz; 
• MSI MX440-8x: 1280x1024x100Hz, 1600x1200x75Hz; 
• Prolink PixelView GeForce4 MX440-8x: 1280x1024x100Hz, 1600x1200x75Hz; 

• 3DMark2001 SE Pro (MadOnion/Remedy) - DirectX 8.1, Hardware TCL, multitexturing, LOW Details, DXTC OFF, double buffering, 24-bit Z-buffer

Game 1, Low details

As you can see, the new solutions from NVIDIA outedge the RADEON 9000 Pro, though the latter is very close on the heels. But the cards from Gainward and Albatron are undoubted leaders. Look how strongly the GeForce4 MX based cards depend on the memory's speed. Although it differs from the GeForce2 MX, but, still, the low effectiveness of the memory throughput makes its effect. 

Game 2, Low details

Now we have another leader... but it has nothing with the Gainward's and Albatron's cards which are still ahead.  

Game 3, Low details

The forces are almost equal in high resolutions (the Gainward GeForce4 PowerPack Pro/600-8X XP Golden Sample thrives again followed by the Albatron GeForce4 MX480). 

3D Marks

 

The NV18 in all three cards fights only against the ATI RADEON 9000 Pro; the RADEON 9000 is far behind in speed and the SIS Xabre400 displays a lower-quality picture. 

Also remember that the ATI RADEON 9000 Pro supports the DirectX 8.1 entirely while the NV18 (MX440-8x) only pretends to support vertex shaders and doesn't know about pixel ones at all.

Below are the summary diagrams from our 3Digest where you can find thorough information on performance of such cards. 

The overclocked cards are marked with red color, the sign o/c (overclocked) is followed by the frequencies reached.

• 1. Return to Castle Wolfenstein - maximum quality settings
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1024x768 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1280x1024 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1600x1200 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

 
• 2. Unreal Tournament 2003 DEMO b.927 - standard settings
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1024x768 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1280x1024 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1600x1200 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

 
• 3. Comanche4 DEMO 
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1024x768 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1280x1024 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1600x1200 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

 
• 4. Comanche4 DEMO (min-max) 
• Minimal and maximum performance marks (Windows XP) 
• itogi-video-c4-min-1024-32.html 
• itogi-video-c4-min-1280-32.html 
• itogi-video-c4-min-1600-32.html 

 
• 5. 3DMark2001, Game2 Low Details (Dragothic) 
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1024x768 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1280x1024 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1600x1200 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

 
• 6. Serious Sam: The Second Encounter 
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1024x768 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1280x1024 
• Tests on Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz),1600x1200 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

 
• 7. 3DMark2001 
• 7.1. 3DMark2001 standard test
• Windows XP (September 2002) 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, 3D Marks 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game1 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game1 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game2 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game2 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game3 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game3 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1024x768, Game4 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, 3D Marks 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game1 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game1 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game2 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game2 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game3 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game3 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1280x1024, Game4 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, 3D Marks 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game1 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game1 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game2 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game2 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game3 Low 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game3 High 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz, 1600x1200, Game4 

 
• 8. iXBT RightMark Video Analyzer 
• Windows XP 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1024x768 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1280x1024 
• Tests on Pentium 4 2533 MHz,1600x1200 

Conclusion

So, do the cards based on the chipsets without DirectX 8.1 make sense, even if they are buttered, with AGP 8x?... Well, yes! While the programmers from ATI are messing up with games and drivers, when one thing is cured and another damaged, the GeForce4 MX based cards will remain popular! Because beside shaders and beautiful waters from Morrowind, users need stability in games and certain protection from bugs. And the RADEON 9000 has a lot of troubles in this respect, though if it had good drivers, the GeForce4 MX would be smashed to pieces :-). At present, cards based on the ATI have very scarce accessory packs at that. And VIVO is supported quite seldom on the RADEON 9000/Pro. 

1. Albatron GeForce4 MX480 - it has no distinguishing features in its appearance, but it possesses two very strong points: an increased frequency of the chip and a relatively low price. In all the other respects, it follows the NVIDIA's recommendations. Besides, I like more the quality of a TV image obtained via the TV-out built into the GPU than quality of a similar image obtained with external codecs.
2. Gainward GeForce4 PowerPack Pro/600-8X XP Golden Sample - it proved to be the fastest sprinter in this round and in its class, well, the label "Golden Sample" forces it to be such. The card possesses all enchanting features, including VIVO. The only downside is that it doesn't have any games coming with it.
3. Leadtek WinFast A180 DDR TH MyVIVO - this is a standard for other companies as far as accessories and components of the card are concerned. Although the capabilities of the MX440 (even with AGP 8x) are too modest for modern games, the Leadtek still looks tempting, and if it's not going to be overpriced, the card will find its customers. Besides, it supports Video-In and hardware monitoring.  
4. MSI MX440-8x - this card has the richest software bundle. It seems that the company made up for the lacking Video-In with an excellent set of games and other programs. There are about ten utilities! Some were already described in our reviews. And the fact that MSI delivers Morrowind, this very popular game, makes me feel respectful to it.  
5. Prolink PixelView GeForce4 MX440-8x - this card supports Video-In (as well as Video-Out :-). It has almost the lowest price among MX440-8x solutions and in addition to VIVO it has 128 MB memory (though it might seem useless now) and a decent software package. The card can easily become popular with such characteristics.  

Highs:

• Very good performance in 3D games (though the RADEON 9000 runs right after the NVIDIA, and at a comparable price it has richer 3D features, though VIVO is rarely supported); 
• High build quality of the tested samples; 
• High overclocking potential; 
• 128 MB memory of the Prolink PixelView GeForce4 MX440-8x, though at present it's useless in games; 
• VIVO supported by the Gainward, Leadtek and Prolink cards; 
• TV-out supported by all the cards. 

• Overpriced MX440-8x cards, according to the preliminary analyses of the prices. 

Write a comment below. No registration needed!

Article navigation: