I can't get my geforce4 mx 440 to work at all, i had to disable all direct3d stuff for it to work, but this way it won't be recognized in any GAME, i'm running it on a soltek mainboard with KT266A chipset. Geforce4 MX440 SUCKS, i think i even rather have my old savage back. At least it worked

all mx cards blow

i have a old system upstairs, its a P2 350, 256 MB of ram win xp pro, with a Geforce 2 mx 440 its has 64 megs of ram it runs halflife great and counterstrike, my Geforce 4 4600 ti runs a hell of alot better, but not every mx card blows, i got my gforce 2 mx 440 overclocked to 300 mhz mem instead of 225, and 420 core Gpu,! instead of the weak 325 mhz

Sounds like somethings wrong with your system, check for BIOS/AGP driver updates. Could be a power problem too I guess.

Is there a way to improve it's performance the best i got was some miserable 1900 Marks with 3dmark2001se (default options)

:evil: kiss my a...
420 core gpu instead of 325 ??
there is no 325 mhz default core speed any of these cards you lamer...
and there is no Geforce2 mx 440 ))
and memeory speeds
)
idiot

There's the Gf2 MX 200 and 400. The 200 has 32 megs of video memory and the 400 has 64. I think he meant 400...



Anyway, I have the GF2 MX 200, and I can tell you all that only the GF4 MX sucks...Not the Geforce 2 one...

Speaking of HL and CS...First of all, you don't need a good card to play those...Personally, I get averages of 70fps in both HL and CS on 1024x768 in 16bits.

I've also played "Better" games like THPS3 (Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3), RTCW (return to castle wolfenstein), MOHAA (medal of honor: allied assault), Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast, Spiderman The Movie, etc. and I can tell you that they all worked fine with my MX card. I had to run THPS3 and Spiderman on 640x480 (16 bits), but the rest give me good frame rates on 800x600. By good I mean over 30fps (can go up to 100, depending on what the card renders in cetrain places...oh and, I Do mean with everything on "max").

Anyway so yeah, the Gf4 MX card is an improved Gf2 MX card from what I hear, and it is nowhere near the performance level of the GF4 Ti cards, but rest asured that not all MX cards "suck".


Big D.

Btw, I forgot to mention Dungeon Siege, which I play...regularly now, and even there, my fame rates can go up to 120. Also, in the games that support it, I also enable EAX (Which can take your frame rate Way down if your sound card doesn't support it or if you don't have the latest drivers for it...Think about that also before you say that the video card "sucks"...)


Big D.

This'll sound obvious, but have you thought about checking your motherboard manufacturer's website to see if there's any bios updates for your board to fix video card issues, etc. :roll:

Also, have you tested your video card in someone elses machine, it's possible you bought a dud. If it does work in another machine, then it means you've definately got to do a bios flash to fix the problem.

If anyone's curious, I've done alot of comparing of the different, and performance from worst to best they are:

GF2-MX200, GF2-MX, GF2-MX400, GF2, GF2-Ti(will o'clock past ultra), GF2-Ultra, GF4-MX440, GF3-Ti200(beats MX460 @ low res), GF4-MX460, GF3, GF3Ti500(will o'clock past ultra), GF3Ultra, GF4-MX480(GF3's faster at res lower than 1024x768, also games that use Vertex/Pixel shader won't be faster than GF3), GF4-4400, GF4-4600 8)

I haven't included GF4-4200 as I don't have much info on this one, but I'd imagine it's probably around the same speed as GF3(standard), but will pull ahead of GF3 in Vertex/Pixel shader enabled games.

As you can see, even the lowest GF4-MX card still beats the top of the wozza GF2 based card, the exception to this is the GF2Ti beats the MX440 at res's lower than 1024x768, but who wants to play games any lower than that if they can help it? :wink:

I'll be honest, my machine's a piece of crap when it comes to 3D Mark 2000/2001, as I'm running a Celeron 300A o'clocked to 450Mhz, and SBLive5.1, GF2Ti, 512Mb PC133, 40Gb WD HDD, but I can still run CS @ 1280x1024, Colin McRae Rally 2 @ 1024 x768, RTCW @ 1024 x768, same with Quake 3, all at 32bit colour, and still get 40fps + in those games.
It's all about how lean or chocked up with crap your machine is, and what drivers you've got.

Hope the info helped a bit...
Treefrog.

[quote] kiss my a...
420 core gpu instead of 325 ??
there is no 325 mhz default core speed any of these cards you lamer...
and there is no Geforce2 mx 440 ))
and memeory speeds
)
idiot

I have the lame 325 gpu, it was defualted onthis crap machine, its easy to over clock you just need really good sys coolin, but for a inbred hick like youwho cares your opion dont mean Jack S*&$ , :evil: this is intended for the inbred hick who dissed everythin i had said, if he knew what a Geforce mx card was then id not have to reply, but iv changed my core and clock with nvmax, and nvhard page, s pls dont quote me unless you know what F*&% your talkin bout, :evil:

So don't use 3D Mark, its a crap benchmark, play your games, be happy.

I was the one who posted the first article. Now i've changed my mind about MX440, what really happened was that my mainborad puts everything on IRQ11 and doesn't allow me to change (there seems to be no possible way around this) but i removed my soundcard (enabled the onboard one), and my modem, and disabled USB controllers. After i ran 3dmak2001se and got 1920 marks. Then i saw some beta drivers and installed them and then ran 3dmark again and got some astonishing 4420 marks!!!! Now i´m happy with my GF4 MX440.

Hehe. what system are you running? I get around 6.000 3Dmarks with my GeForce3 Ti500 running on a T-Bird 1.2GHz, 768Mb SDRAM.


_______________________________________
Resistance is futile, all your base are belong to us

for all those who are having the problem with the gforce cards, more than likley your problem is with your agp str value in your bios. its probly set to auto now, which works somstimes, but takes the latter end of the stick. if your using a gf2mx400, then go with EC. (thats north/south: C:E). FOr those of you that use an asus a7v with bios verision 1.08 - 1.1 > then you will want to either revert back to bios version 1.07, or use wpcredit to check your values. 1.07 bios are the only bios i know of that don't reset the value after youve changed it. If by some slim chance this doesn't work for you, you can try increasing your V. to your agp slot. Increaseing agp voltage increases pci voltage as well, so be carefu

mpa

You just can`t install your new hardware&software.
I also have Gf 4 mx 440 but i have Ultra (290/440 - NO OVC !!! DDR 4ns)
and it work OK !!!