StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Of course. MX cards are the spawn of satan. Merely warmed over
GeForce 2s

... That cost the same. So what's the problem?

SPOOFE wrote: ... That cost the same. So what's the problem?

They label them as Ge Force 4 MXes, which confuses
people.

They label them as Ge Force 4 MXes, which confuses
people.

Uh... y'know, if someone's gonna get confused by the difference between a $150 product that says "GeForce 4 Ti4200" and a $40 product that says "GeForce 4 MX-440", then he's an idiot and deserves what he gets.

SPOOFE wrote: Uh... y'know, if someone's gonna get confused by the difference between a $150 product that says "GeForce 4 Ti4200" and a $40 product that says "GeForce 4 MX-440", then he's an idiot and deserves what he gets.

They have the same god damn name, genius. It would have been better
for NVIDIA to create a totally different GeForce Naming scheme, like
calling the MXes GeForce Lite, rather than making it look like they're
part of the same chip family as the GF 4

I think what Spoofe is trying to say is that anyone that doesn't look at what they're buying, and research it deserves what they get.

They have the same god damn name, genius.

"GeForce 4 Ti 4200" vs. "GeForce 4 MX440"

Maybe you learned to read at the School For The Giftedly Retarded, Sheppy, but those two names don't look the same to me.

Let me help you a little here. This is what you and I see:

GeForce 4 Ti 4200 vs. GeForce 4 MX440

And this is what the average consumer sees:

GeForce 4 Ti 4200 vs. GeForce 4 MX440

I'm not usually an idiot apologist, but keeping up with the latest hardware can be downright hard sometimes and I don't think it was too much to ask that nVidia kept things a little less confusing.

The Kernel wrote:Yeah the GeForce MX was truly a piece of shit.

I just bought myself a 5900 non-ultra off Pricewatch for $195. Same chip and 256-bit memory bus as the 5900-ultra. With a little luck, I should be able to overclock it to 5900/5950 levels. Hot damn!

Truly excellent card at an equally excellent price. I'd do the same, but with the next gen cards around the corner I just can't justify getting a card right now.

btw, I don't know whether it was intentional or not (I'm guessing typo), but Newegg is selling Radeon 9800 Pros (made by ATI) in retail boxes for $292. Like, holy shit Scoob! [/b]

SPOOFE wrote: Maybe you learned to read at the School For The Giftedly Retarded, Sheppy, but those two names don't look the same to me.

Kernel said it best, the customer sees the name GeForce 4 on
all the cards and is confused as to which is best. I was too, I
thought the GF4 MXes were actually an improvement too, until
I read that they were only marginally better than the old GF2
MXes, so why call them GF4s?

They were called GF4MXs for marketting reasons only, despite their use of a totally different core. It has apparently been succesful.

Kernel said it best, the customer sees the name GeForce 4 on
all the cards and is confused as to which is best.

Don't backpedal, Sheppy, you said that "they have the same goddamned name", not "the average consumer is too lazy to read what it says on the box".

In which case, the same rule applies... Nvidia does NOT call them the same thing. They call them different names. Should we complain about "Mustang" vs. "Mustang GT"?

It's not like people go out and buy a new graphic's card as an impulse buy.

I was too, I thought the GF4 MXes were actually an improvement too

Well, we already knew you were an idiot, Sheppy. You don't need to go and prove it for us.

until I read that they were only marginally better than the old GF2
MXes, so why call them GF4s?

Marketing, mostly. But it's hardly deceptive, since they don't call them the same thing.

This is like calling Windows NT, Windows NT "MX", it's Windows 3.1 but you have 10 more apps.

SPOOFE wrote: In which case, the same rule applies... Nvidia does NOT call them the same thing. They call them different names. Should we complain about "Mustang" vs. "Mustang GT"?

By your logic, it's OK for Ford to call a Yugo 4 cylinder banger
produced under license with some new bodywork a Mustang,
as long as they tack a "MX" on the end of the name?

It's not like people go out and buy a new graphic's card as an impulse buy.

You'd be fucking surprised. Especially when you NEED a card
to replace the one that got burnt up, really fast.

Well, we already knew you were an idiot, Sheppy. You don't need to go and prove it for us.

And we know all about your man-boy-love fetish, and how you
have several gigs of child porn on your hard drive, along with
this as your homepage.

But go ahead, and keep acting like an arrogant fuckstick, which
you are.

Marketing, mostly. But it's hardly deceptive, since they don't call them the same thing.

Ahh, you're a fuckstick. They call them both GeForce 4, implying that
they are the same family, and one is merely a slimmed down
cheaper version, when in reality the GeForce 4 Ti and the GeForce 4
MX are two totally different CPUs and codepaths.

(The GF4 Ti is a NV25 design, while the GF4 MX is a NV17 design)

This is like slapping a Mustang nameplate on a Yugo and calling
it a Mustang.

I should also point out that when the GeForce MX was released, the top end GeForce MX 460 was only $20 cheaper then the Ti4200. Doesn't look so clearcut from a price standpoint does it?

*bangs head*

jesus, NVIDIA needs to unfuck their naming scheme big time.

HA! I'd bet money they intentionally made their naming scheme screwy.