GF4 ti 4200 Vs R8500 (not a Flame)

[Hellbinder]

Ok here is the scoop. I have had adequate time to test the two cards and have come to some conclusions.

The contendors.

-Ati retail Radeon 64

-MSI GF4 Ti 4200 128.


ok, Several people on this site are going to disagree with me and think i am just trying to make troubble. I can assure you, this is not the case. While I may not be able to speak for all Radeon or All GF4's in the world, both models I have are high quality.

First.

The GF4 Ti 4200 running stock flat out smokes the Radeon 8500 in every game I own by at least 20 FPS. further you really notice the difference in the low end of the FPS scale. Also, and likely due to the added 64mb ram. Everything is very smooth. Texture loading etc are much quicker.

Loading times on games are shockingly faster with the GF4. Of course the other things you already know. FSAA is faster. It looks pretty ok. I still hate Quincunx.

Now for the bad news, and something that quite frankley shocked me.

There is still simply *no* comparrison in IQ between the the cards. In either 2D or 3D. In fact I am finding myself wondering what the hell is wrong with many of you people who claim the GF4 is equal to the 8500. While I am only one set of eyes there are simpley some things that defy personal interpretation.

Its not a big general problem, or something that makes the GF4 look bad. Its the little details. for instance the Water line in Tribes 2. My GF4 has a little jagged saw edge all the way around, even up close without zoom. the 8500 on the other hand. Razor sharp as far as the eye can see.

There is a general lack of sharpness to every game ive run so far. Could be LOD not sure. The fog looks slightly grainer. As do the smoke etc. Colors are simply not as sharp. EMBM, reflections etc.. simply look *duller*.

To sum it up the Radeon's IQ overall is simpley Razor sharp in every area. The GF4 is just not the same.

2D. Here is where i just about blew a fuse. At least with this card anything above 1024x768x32 is slightly fuzzy. The Radeon is again, razor sharp. I cant find what speed the Ramdac is on this GF4, but it supports all the same refresh rates as the 8500.

All in all i have very mixed feelings. I am running the card overclocked and now average 60FPS in snowy park with max details at 1024x768x32. That is WAAAAAY up from the 28-35 FPS I was getting with the 8500 at the exact same settings. Omaha beach, looking up accross the beach at the bunkers 70-90 FPS. I was lucky to hit 30 FPS with the 8500. Tribes 2.. i actually hit 206 (inside) while playing a little while ago. Max settings at 1024x768x32. It averages about 145. I have never seen it dip below 50 even in the most *extreme* conditions.

On the other side. I feel a little cheated, or cheapened. The IQ is just not the same. I simply cant understand how so many review sites claim the GF4 IQ is on par with the 8500. It just is NOT. Period. end of story. You can claim personal interpretation all you want. One look at any one of a dozen things I could show you... its over.

Perhaps I could do some tweaking with the lod etc.. In fact i get the feeling that there are a slew of questionable reviews out there that did just that *before* they compared the cards.

Am i happy? yes pretty much. the raw speed is a sight to behold. And perhaps in time I can find some tweaks that enhance the IQ. As soon as i have some time, i will post some pics, and talk in greater detail about Aniso and FSAA.

 

[Hellbinder]

here is my new 3dmark score.. 10841

http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=3743417

Notice below My new system is

P4 2.4b
i850EMD2 at 533mhz fsb
512mb pc800 ram
win xp

MSI GF4 Ti 4200 Oc 300/530
latest Nvidia drivers

 

[BenM]

How does the 4xS work for you?

As for the 2D, the Gainward and Leadtek cards are typically much better than others.

Does the filter mod that worked on GeForce2s work on GF4s?

 

[BRiT]

]here is my new 3dmark score.. 10841

Was that with or without splash screens?

--|BRiT|

 

[Saem]

How have the Catalyst drivers been with the 8500 in Tribes 2?

 

[Sharkfood]

Its the little details. for instance the Water line in Tribes 2. My GF4 has a little jagged saw edge all the way around, even up close without zoom

I posted the same things in my findings with the GF4. My speculation is it is due to their new z-buffer optimizations to help improve performance. It's most noticeable in OpenGL. Tribes, Tribes2, Quake3 and most everything OpenGL has large amounts of z-buffer errors and aliasing. It manifests itself as sawblade edges, flickering textures and missing components of surfaces.

If you fire up the first Tribes, host a local game, then start on Broadsides- if you go to the part of the level by the double ramps near the front of the base, the side panels are totally gacked and many surfaces in the game are also similarly messed up. An example are the dark ripped areas across this panel here:

There is a general lack of sharpness to every game ive run so far. Could be LOD not sure.

I've posted on this in the past and it's not new to the GF4. It's not LOD bias either, but instead seems to be some sort of internal degradation of LOD that occurs by mipmap. It just seems the LOD Bias is used to algorithmically diminish LOD for each new mipmap layer so without anisotropy, the display looks horrible. Even by using overly aggressive LOD Bias, the closer mipmaps sharpen up and start to alias massively, but farther mipmaps remain extremely poor and blurry. It appears to be another performance related option.

It's no doubt the card is indeed faster, but the visual differences might lead one to quickly understand why... and it's anyone's guess how such optimizations at the expense of image quality would perform on the 8500 if the same were applied.

Cheers,
-Shark

 

[SvP]

Try http://www.omegacorner.com/

Also, Do you remember that I was trying to get more image quality from direct 3d?, well, that's fixed!!!, now textures look sharper than ever and detail is VERY HIGH, and for OpenGL, I have archived an even more higher detail than the last time.

There are also some before-after screenshots...

You could see if an how much the IQ is improved and also if and how much the framerate drops. Not that it means much, but a bit interesting nevertheless

 

[Hellbinder]

BenM

How does the 4xS work for you?

Well, it looks nice, but it makes Anarchy online Freeze solid after just a few seconds. (one of my most important D3D games. ) AO is much smoother playing and loading with my new system.

 

[Seiko]

Both cards where tested in your new system?

Hellbinder[CE] I'm assuming you did test both cards in your new system? I only mention it as I wouldn't have expected any noticeable game loading time differences between the 2 cards unless your using compressed textures?

Also, have you managed to get the IQ of the 4200 anywhere near the 8500 using its full goody bag of FSAA and max ansio? I have an 8500 (replaced a V5500) and now I simply adore the IQ level. The V5 IQ with aggressive lod and 4*FSAA was hard to surpass but the 8500 does and manages to keep the framerates.

I'd be interested to hear more on your tweaking experiences with the 4200 as it's competively priced against the 8500.

Of course this highlights the growing concerns about the general level of review sites as you quite rightly point out all seem to claim the same level of IQ !

 

[Hellbinder]

yes tested on the same system.

The Gf4 simply loads games faster. It has faster Compression or *something*...

My comparrisons are without FSAA or Aniso. I am talking both cards flat out stock. There are simply to many differences between them to do a totally honest comparrison any other way imo.

For instance, If you crank the LOD on the GF4 to compensate for the blurier FSAA you get the exact same Miore effect that Nvidia types complain about straight Ansio on the radeon. Tweaking each card back and forth ultimatly results in unplayable framerates or undesireable effects on both cards.

For instance.

Setting the GF4 to 2x FSAA with aniso and or Lod adjustmetts plummets my FPS on snowy park to the low 20's. It also results in the exact *spakely* texture effect that sometimes is associated with the radeon aniso. Except it does it in every single game.

I have been doing a lot of experimenting. The more i do, The more it becomes flat out obvious that there are some very misleading reviews and *opinions* on the internet where the Gf4 is concerned. The whole truth is simply not being shared. On the other hand, anyone who thinks that the Radon 8500 even with the catalyst drivers is anywhere even close to the performance of the ti 4200 is sadly mistaken. Only with Aniso cranked is it faster.

The IQ iussues i am dealing with are not related to FSAA or Aniso. Its is the rendering precision. Crispness, sharpness, accuracy of depth etc..

 

[pascal]

]...

Now for the bad news, and something that quite frankley shocked me.

There is still simply *no* comparrison in IQ between the the cards. In either 2D or 3D. In fact I am finding myself wondering what the hell is wrong with many of you people who claim the GF4 is equal to the 8500. While I am only one set of eyes there are simpley some things that defy personal interpretation.

Its not a big general problem, or something that makes the GF4 look bad. Its the little details. for instance the Water line in Tribes 2. My GF4 has a little jagged saw edge all the way around, even up close without zoom. the 8500 on the other hand. Razor sharp as far as the eye can see.

There is a general lack of sharpness to every game ive run so far. Could be LOD not sure. The fog looks slightly grainer. As do the smoke etc. Colors are simply not as sharp. EMBM, reflections etc.. simply look *duller*.

To sum it up the Radeon's IQ overall is simpley Razor sharp in every area. The GF4 is just not the same.

2D. Here is where i just about blew a fuse. At least with this card anything above 1024x768x32 is slightly fuzzy. The Radeon is again, razor sharp. I cant find what speed the Ramdac is on this GF4, but it supports all the same refresh rates as the 8500.

All in all i have very mixed feelings. I am running the card overclocked and now average 60FPS in snowy park with max details at 1024x768x32. That is WAAAAAY up from the 28-35 FPS I was getting with the 8500 at the exact same settings. Omaha beach, looking up accross the beach at the bunkers 70-90 FPS. I was lucky to hit 30 FPS with the 8500. Tribes 2.. i actually hit 206 (inside) while playing a little while ago. Max settings at 1024x768x32. It averages about 145. I have never seen it dip below 50 even in the most *extreme* conditions.

On the other side. I feel a little cheated, or cheapened. The IQ is just not the same. I simply cant understand how so many review sites claim the GF4 IQ is on par with the 8500. It just is NOT. Period. end of story. You can claim personal interpretation all you want. One look at any one of a dozen things I could show you... its over.

Thanks Hellbinder

Dont worry, you are not alone because sometimes I feel bad with my GF3Ti200. My previous card was a standard Radeon DDR and the image quality was great, vibrant and razor sharp. Sometimes I miss it.

 

[jvd]

well

there is about a 150 dollar diffrence between the cards . The radeon isn't as fast a 4200 but its faster than a ti 500. I can get the 128 meg version for 200 at compusa , the le for 150 . Geforce 4 4200 about 250.

 

[Typedef Enum]

The one thing you have to keep reminding yourself of is that those type of issues that were brought up: 2D quality, crispness, etc...Those ARE the subtle differences between manufacturers.

I'm not really that familiar with the manufacturer of your card, but you will find plenty of opinions when it comes to this issue. People who have bought several different brands of the same chip (be it GF3, GF4, etc.) will swear up and down that there are differences. This is one of the unfortunate things you run into when there isn't a "built by nVidia."

 

[Dave Glue]

]Ok here is the scoop. I have had adequate time to test the two cards and have come to some conclusions.

Its not a big general problem, or something that makes the GF4 look bad. Its the little details. for instance the Water line in Tribes 2. My GF4 has a little jagged saw edge all the way around, even up close without zoom. the 8500 on the other hand. Razor sharp as far as the eye can see.

This is indeed quite troubling. I accept some jagged edges in some games with my GF2ti, simply because I'm usually playing in 16bit colour for speed reasons. The fact that even in 32bit colour these zbuffer errors are occuring with the GF4 is worriesome, as getting rid of these errors is one of the reasons I want a GF4 (image quality with 32bit, in terms of banding etc is secondary to reducing these errors IMO).

How about it, GF4 owners? Are you seeing sorting errors in a lot of games with 32 bit colour/zbuffer, or any at all? I'm quite surprised this is the first I've heard of this, then again as I experienced with my V5500/GF2 comparison some years back, most on-line reviews are quite shallow (present company excluded, of course).

The extreme speed disparity between the 8500/GF4 is frustrating as well, as I was looking at an 8500 (the GF2ti 4200's are in extreme short supply here in Toronto). They're an absolute steal - at least in _paper_ specs compared to the competition.

 

[jpprod]

]for instance the Water line in Tribes 2. My GF4 has a little jagged saw edge all the way around, even up close without zoom. the 8500 on the other hand. Razor sharp as far as the eye can see.

That sounds like a depth buffer issue, it seems that for some odd reason the GF4 is not using enough depth precision bits in that particular place. Check that you don't have "force 16 bit depth buffer" enabled for OpenGL in the detonator driver panel.

 

[Prime]

How about it, GF4 owners?

All I can relate is my personal experiences, but IMO, my GF4 looks and plays better than my r8500 ever did. In 2D, the radeon was noticeably better at 1600x1200x85, but at anything less, the difference is not really noticeable to me. Performance-wise, there's no comparison, as I mainly play OpenGL FPS games. Plus, I like the IQ better on my Q4 simply due to the mip-map lines not being nearly as obvious. On my r8500, the mip-map lines drove me nuts. I've not noticed much in the way of Z-buffer errors, but I don't stand around looking at the walls either, so they may be there. All in all, I'm very happy with my GF4, and I wasn't happy at all with my r8500. In the radeons defense though, the newer drivers are supposed to be quite a bit better than the ones I had during my 5 months with it.

 

[noko]

That is one of the things I noticed when I went from my Radeon64 to my Visiontech GF3 Ti200, the colors are faded and not as sharp on the Ti200. More jagged edges in certain respects then on the Radeon64. Over time I grew use to my Ti200 and just been enjoying the games. Yet I remember at times on my Radeon64 I would just be blown away by what I was seeing, on my Ti200 I don't remember that ever happening.

 

[Nagorak]

Not to flame, but this seems like kind of a bad time to upgrade to a Ti4200. If you'd just waited another month the Parhelia would be out and the R300 would be on its way. Now, even if you're not planning on getting either of those cards, their debuts will cause prices to drop across the board. So you might have been better served by waiting just a little longer.

 

[Hellbinder]

I wanted a card with Video in. So i could mess around with my new Digital Camcorder. This was the best solution given the price. Overclocking results speak for themselves.

Dont worry, my friends and co-workers always benefit from my excessive Upgrade addiction. I figure Ill give the R300 a month or two for the drivers to stabalize before i snag it. I am simply not at all interested in the Parhelia. ill be snaging myself a R300 the end of september, or october....

Remember my card only cost 220$ retail.

 

[Nagorak]

Fair enough.