Replacement for GF2 MX400

Van_Isle · Jan 5, 2004, 06:18 AM

Friend of mine has an Athlon TB 1400, 512Mb PC2100, QDI Kudoz 7 Motherboard. He does a lot of flight simulator gaming, including on-line stuff. Combat Flight Simulator 2, IL-2 Sturmovik Forgotten Battles, etc. Some other games (Ghost Recon).

He has purchased a Radeon 9600 Pro. Lots of issues getting it to run. (current thread under ATI Graphics Cards).

In the rare moment he did get it running he says did not notice much improvement over the GF2 (Asus 7100 Pro) in terms of FPS.

What would be good alternative to the Radeon for an upgrade? He purchased the Radeon for around $230 (Can) and can still return it. Would want to stay in same $$ ballpark.

Not sure if he needs Directx 9 support.

Would a CPU upgrade also help get his framerates up?

The GF2 is giving him 3821 3d marks under 3dMark2001SE. I hesitate to try any of the newer versions of this on the old GF2.

Vampyromaniac · Jan 5, 2004, 09:57 AM

Flight simulators are usually more dependent on the CPU, so I think a CPU upgrade would be his best bet.

Matth · Jan 5, 2004, 05:54 PM

3Dmark 2003 WILL run, but really highlights the shortcomings of a GF2MX
ONLY the first test (uses DX7) will run - and the resulting score (from a GF2MX400) is likely to be around 120-150.

A Geforce 4 Ti (NOT MX!) would run all but the last test (needs DX9) with a cumulative score probably better than a Geforce FX of similar price - despite the FX completing the DX9 test as well.

The Geforce FX range is DESPERATELY in need of a price-performance adjustment, be it a major clock speed boost or dropping the lowest model altogether.

Van_Isle · Jan 6, 2004, 06:40 AM

Well some searching on vendor web sites and QDI site reveals that the Kudoz7 Ver 1 that we have here will only accept Palomino core Athlon XP's and they seem not to be available anymore. So it would have to be a used CPU for any upgrade.

But Asus nForce2 or KT-600 boards are out there locally for around $110 (Can) that would accept his RAM and current CPU and (at least for now) allow him to move up CPU-wise as he gets $$ available.

Am trying to get the 9600 Pro working (at all) on current board.....if not it goes back to vendor for refund. And then we look for alternatives. OR if I get the 9600 running stable and it sucks due to CPU / motherboard limitations then we look for alternatives.

Following the idea that flight simulators make more use of CPU:

Given he has PC2100 DDR, I think he could go up maximum on a new board to an XP 2400+ (about $110 (Can)) on the 266FSB, then he would have to do new RAM. But at what point do we say.....chuck the GeForce 2 as well?

In other words what is best upgrade path?

Does anyone have any ideas on how a Athlon 1400 / Radeon 9600 Pro would compare with Athlon XP 2400+ / GeForce 2 MX?

The_Neon_Cowboy · Jan 6, 2004, 08:19 AM

a sugestion: you might go the way of a new board and a bit of overclocking

if money is tight

also i made a new post to your thread about the 9600 issues

Van_Isle · Jan 6, 2004, 09:31 AM

Well, I would not be adverse to a bit-o-o'clock.....but my friend uses this machine also for his business....so I don't think such a great idea. I have been working on him getting a basic 2nd PC for his "mission critical stuff" (wait....that's the gaming, right?)

Jan 5, 2004, 06:18 AM	#1
Van_Isle DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Sidney BC Canada Posts: 9 Rep Power: 0	Replacement for GF2 MX400 Friend of mine has an Athlon TB 1400, 512Mb PC2100, QDI Kudoz 7 Motherboard. He does a lot of flight simulator gaming, including on-line stuff. Combat Flight Simulator 2, IL-2 Sturmovik Forgotten Battles, etc. Some other games (Ghost Recon). He has purchased a Radeon 9600 Pro. Lots of issues getting it to run. (current thread under ATI Graphics Cards). In the rare moment he did get it running he says did not notice much improvement over the GF2 (Asus 7100 Pro) in terms of FPS. What would be good alternative to the Radeon for an upgrade? He purchased the Radeon for around $230 (Can) and can still return it. Would want to stay in same $$ ballpark. Not sure if he needs Directx 9 support. Would a CPU upgrade also help get his framerates up? The GF2 is giving him 3821 3d marks under 3dMark2001SE. I hesitate to try any of the newer versions of this on the old GF2.

Jan 5, 2004, 09:57 AM	#2
Vampyromaniac confutatis maledictis Join Date: May 2002 Location: somewhere dark Posts: 5,974 Rep Power: 77 System Specs	Flight simulators are usually more dependent on the CPU, so I think a CPU upgrade would be his best bet. __________________ *Digitalis 3.3* Athlon 64 3000 // ASUS K8V SE Deluxe // 1024MB PC3200 (2-2-2-10 1T) ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Pro // 20" Dell 2005FPW (DVI) M-Audio Revo 7.1 + Philips Acoustic Edge // Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 320/16 Western Digital WD3200KS + 120/8 Seagate 7200.7 NEC ND-3550A 16x DVD±RW + Lite-On 52x24x CD-RW Antec Sonata case // 480W Antec TruePower personal bests \|\| Aq'3: 46796 \| 3D'01: 20461 \| 3D'03: 6336 \| 3D'05: 2677 \| PC'04: 4605 \| PC'02: 7691,9092,1250

Jan 6, 2004, 08:19 AM	#5
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 92 System Specs	a sugestion: you might go the way of a new board and a bit of overclocking if money is tight also i made a new post to your thread about the 9600 issues __________________

Jan 5, 2004, 05:54 PM	#3
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	3Dmark 2003 WILL run, but really highlights the shortcomings of a GF2MX ONLY the first test (uses DX7) will run - and the resulting score (from a GF2MX400) is likely to be around 120-150. A Geforce 4 Ti (NOT MX!) would run all but the last test (needs DX9) with a cumulative score probably better than a Geforce FX of similar price - despite the FX completing the DX9 test as well. The Geforce FX range is DESPERATELY in need of a price-performance adjustment, be it a major clock speed boost or dropping the lowest model altogether.

Jan 6, 2004, 06:40 AM	Thread Starter #4
Van_Isle DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Sidney BC Canada Posts: 9 Rep Power: 0	Well some searching on vendor web sites and QDI site reveals that the Kudoz7 Ver 1 that we have here will only accept Palomino core Athlon XP's and they seem not to be available anymore. So it would have to be a used CPU for any upgrade. But Asus nForce2 or KT-600 boards are out there locally for around $110 (Can) that would accept his RAM and current CPU and (at least for now) allow him to move up CPU-wise as he gets $$ available. Am trying to get the 9600 Pro working (at all) on current board.....if not it goes back to vendor for refund. And then we look for alternatives. OR if I get the 9600 running stable and it sucks due to CPU / motherboard limitations then we look for alternatives. Following the idea that flight simulators make more use of CPU: Given he has PC2100 DDR, I think he could go up maximum on a new board to an XP 2400+ (about $110 (Can)) on the 266FSB, then he would have to do new RAM. But at what point do we say.....chuck the GeForce 2 as well? In other words what is best upgrade path? Does anyone have any ideas on how a Athlon 1400 / Radeon 9600 Pro would compare with Athlon XP 2400+ / GeForce 2 MX?

Jan 6, 2004, 09:31 AM	Thread Starter #6
Van_Isle DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Sidney BC Canada Posts: 9 Rep Power: 0	Well, I would not be adverse to a bit-o-o'clock.....but my friend uses this machine also for his business....so I don't think such a great idea. I have been working on him getting a basic 2nd PC for his "mission critical stuff" (wait....that's the gaming, right?)