Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Geforce 4 MX specs
- Thread starter jadam
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ok, 1.1 billion pixels a second......... Thats decent, A geforce 2 ti does 1.0 billion pixels..., so the means this card is better than a geforce 2 Ti, but worse than a geforce 3 ti 200, how many gigapixels does a geforce 3 do, i think its like 3.3 but correct me if im wrong
Its a geforce 4 MX not a Geforce 4 Ti, the Geforce 4's are supposed to have like 128mb DDR memory and 6 pipelines or something like that, and the Geforce 4's kick ass...
The benifet of having a Geforce 4 MX to a Geforce 3, is that higher clock speed, i think it has like a 300mhz clock and 250mhz memory, plus you get whatever new features nvidia put into the geforce 4 and 3, like programmable **** which apple has yet to implent into OS X.
the Geforce 2 MX was much better than the original Geforce, but it failed in that it only had SDR and was not able compete with the Geforce DDR. This Geforce 4 MX has DDR just like the Geforce 3, but it also has a much higher clock speed and faster memory, just wondering how many gigapixels a geforce 3 can process
gaming
who gives a flying f**k crappy mac gaming is. News flash, if you want to play games buy a PC. If you need to get actual work done without any problems and in the shortest time possible, get a Mac. Oh and if your eye can detect the difference between 100 fps and 105 fps you should stop staring at the screen because the human eye can only detect a little less than 50(don't quote me on it). Sorry for the rant but as a person that couldn't care less how fast my game will refresh at millions of colors I think people should realize that there is a point of no return to these sort of things. Just be happy that there is a decent Mac card out there that will display guts, gore, and glory at frame rates and texture depths greater than your eye can detect.
With that said, does anyone realize that these are probably not the same chips as those that were in the dual 800's. Apollos?
who gives a flying f**k crappy mac gaming is. News flash, if you want to play games buy a PC. If you need to get actual work done without any problems and in the shortest time possible, get a Mac. Oh and if your eye can detect the difference between 100 fps and 105 fps you should stop staring at the screen because the human eye can only detect a little less than 50(don't quote me on it). Sorry for the rant but as a person that couldn't care less how fast my game will refresh at millions of colors I think people should realize that there is a point of no return to these sort of things. Just be happy that there is a decent Mac card out there that will display guts, gore, and glory at frame rates and texture depths greater than your eye can detect.
With that said, does anyone realize that these are probably not the same chips as those that were in the dual 800's. Apollos?