Radeon 9000 -> GeForce4 Ti

Discussion in 'Games' started by Nermal, Jan 13, 2004.

  1. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #1
    I'm considering upgrading the Radeon 9000 Pro in my MDD G4 (1.25 GHz, 1.25 GB) to a GeForce4 Ti.

    The games I play, and how well they run:
    Halo (plays well, but low-res)
    Jedi Academy (horrible)
    Neverwinter Nights (good)
    Quake 3 (excellent)
    Warcraft 3 (excellent)
    RTCW (good)

    And I hope to get Doom 3 once it comes out. Does anyone know whether the performance boost will be "worth it"? The total cost will be around $100-$150, depending on how much I can sell my old Radeon for.
     
  2. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #2
    I would strongly consider that you get a Radeon 9800 instead. The Retail version offers you FSAA and AF overrides for any game. Also the 9800 will be faster, as the GF4Ti is an older card.
     
  3. yamabushi macrumors 65816

    yamabushi

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    #3
    If you are looking for the best value for your money, this review by Tom's Hardware might help. The R9000 and GF4Ti cards are listed in the benchmarks which include DirectX 8 cards.
     
  4. amnesiac1984 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    Europe
    #4
    I have the same setup as you and jedi academy runs really well, much better than halo. In fact I have a slower CPU than you (Dual 1ghz MDD).
     
  5. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #5
    Yeah, but there's no way I can afford a 9800 :eek:
     
  6. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #6
    I wonder if it being a dual's got anything to do with it, do you know if Academy is MP-aware?
     
  7. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #7
    also you have to consider Adc, if you have a monitor with adc you are limited unless you get a $100 adapter for 9800. the geforce 4 titanium will allow a bump in your resolution but you arent going to gain much in frame rates. a higher card will run the higher resolutions better with more candy but they dont give you frames as some would let you think. you have to feed the card and with poor ports and G4s that have slow clocks its pretty hard to feed these cards with a G4. you dont say what os you are using so if using Jag going to panther should help. bumping that ram to a gig or more helps to.
     
  8. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #8
    That was very helpful. Of the 4 games in that list that I play, a GF4 will, on average, make it 61% faster.
     
  9. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #9
    Yes, I'm concerned about getting a card that's "too good" for my system. The reason I'm considering the GF4, other than price, is the fact that it is listed as one of Apple's BTO options for my system, and therefore should work well with it (presumably that's sensible logic?).

    I'm running Panther, and already have over a gig of memory.
     
  10. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #10
    What Apple says isnt always best lol... a GF4 is nice, but only ok as far as todays graphics go.
     
  11. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #11
    remember to look at the resolutions at toms hardware, at high resolutions you will notice a difference but also keep in mind these are not open gl frames you are looking at. they are directx. different animal. what resolutions are you playing. why iam asking is because if you take a 9000 vs a geforce4titanium at say 800x 600 there will be almost no difference but as you crank up the resolution the 9000 will fall further back so its not that you are gaining frames you simply are not loosing them as resolutions go higher.
     
  12. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #12
    I suppose I'm making myself look like a bit of an idiot by leaving out all this important stuff :(

    Basically, I'm pushing up the res as high as I can, until it gets too slow to play. So for games like Quake 3 and Warcraft 3, I'm running at 1024x768 (the highest this old CRT supports), but Halo's at 640x480.

    I realise that OpenGL and DirectX are different, but is it wrong to assume that the performance difference will be similar?
     
  13. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #13
    geforce4 Titanium is a Great 1024x768 card, the 9000 is a great 800x600 card when it comes to FPS. those comparisons at toms Hardware are probably being Fed or pushed by a Intel 3.0 or 3.2. remember the dual 1.42 was getting its butt kicked by single 3.0 Intels. I had seen some great comparisons with open gl cards on Mac. i think inside mac games had them. ill look around. There ought to be a lot of Mac users here running a Geforce4Tit. Arn has one but not sure if he games on it. hopefully somebody with a dual g4 can comment.
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    here try thishttp://www.insidemacgames.com/hardware/ click on the 9800 in the video reviews and they do a very in depth comparison on your dual 1.25 with everycard you can put in that thing. enjoy:)
     
  15. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #15
    Except that don't compare with the nVidia cards, apparently they couldn't get hold of any :(

    BTW, I've only got a single 1.25, but I guess that doesn't make much difference. I've never owned a duallie (Mac or PC) so I'm not sure how much difference it makes in the "real world".
     
  16. CubeHacker macrumors 65816

    CubeHacker

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    #16
    Getting the Geforce4 would allow you to turn your resolution up, and perhaps some graphics options up without much loss in framerate. However, framerate is more dependant on CPU speed, so a new video card wouldn't help you get much faster framerates over what you have now. A Radeon 9800 Pro, while an awesome video card, would be way overkill for your computer.
     
  17. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #17
    I'm not going to get a 9800, so this is just a hypothetical question:

    The ATI website says that the 9800 requires OS 10.2.5. Does this mean that it won't work at all in OS 9? Or does it just mean that some of the advanced features won't work?
     
  18. hvfsl macrumors 68000

    hvfsl

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #18
    It will function like a Radeon 8500 on OS 9, if it works at all.
     
  19. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #19
    I'm afarid that there will be no grfx acceleration at all in Mac OS 9: 2D (QuickDraw, QuickTime) nor 3D (Rave, OpenGL).
     
  20. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #20
    Right, the 9800 is definitely out of the question then. I might wait for the GF4Ti to drop in price a bit before buying. Or at least wait for the release of Doom3 so I can see how well it runs on my Radeon.
     
  21. BIGgui_X_ macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    #21
    GF4

    Where cna you get a geforce 4 TI to fit in a dual 1.25 G4 ?? except from apple, i cant find any !!

    thay are still very expensives !!

    thansk !!
     
  22. lewdvig macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    South Pole
    #22
    Too expensive actually. For the money, you can almost get a 9800pro.

    At certain point the G4 is going to bottleneck the 9800p. At that point you can tunr up the details and effects like FSAA and AF w/o adversely effecting fps. It's a fine balance that will differ by game, but it is worth it.

    I have the exact same MDD and consider it unsuitable for gaming. I have been considering getting the GF4 too, but the cheapest I can find one is $300 CDN. That is a stupid price.

    I paid $350 for the 9800np in my PC which I flashed into a 9800xt.
     
  23. lewdvig macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    South Pole
    #23
    The Doom III alpha showed the 8500/9000 and GF4 are almost equally bad at DoomIII.

    The extra ram will make a difference though. The pretty graphics in D3 are a result of BIG texture maps, bump mapping, stencil shadows. The GF4 handles all of these things better.
     
  24. Nermal thread starter Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #24
    Re: GF4

    $309.49 :)
     
  25. alxths macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #25
    I think I remember hearing that new games like Doom 3 won't run on geforce 4s...? On PCs at least, I believe it's because they have no directx 9 support...

    But I dont really keep up to date on these things so, who knows...

    edit: oh, and why has no one yet mentioned the 9600?
     

Share This Page