# Geforce 4 vs. 3

**URL:** https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990
**Category:** Archived
**Tags:** hardware-discussions
**Created:** [August 28, 2002, 7:54am UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990 "2002-08-28T07:54:39Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![omen972](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/6a8cbe/32.png) [@omen972](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/omen972)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2002, 7:54am UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/1 "2002-08-28T07:54:39Z")

</div>

Is Maya going to run faster on a geforce 3 ti500 that is patched by Riva tuner  
Or faster on a Geforce 4 MX unpatched (last I checked you cannot patch these)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/skelter)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2002, 9:54am UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/2 "2002-08-28T09:54:40Z")

</div>

Maya will be faster with the GF4 so go for it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![grocs](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/b487fb/32.png) [@grocs](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/grocs)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2002, 3:49pm UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/3 "2002-08-28T15:49:59Z")

</div>

not on a gF4 MX it won`t... it`ll be faster on a GF 4 Ti though...

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/skelter)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2002, 7:00pm UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/4 "2002-08-28T19:00:43Z")

</div>

The GF3 is really poor in pro OpenGL stuff.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![1000101-](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/1/3be4f8/32.png) [@1000101-](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/1000101-)
#### Post date: [August 29, 2002, 2:55pm UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/5 "2002-08-29T14:55:43Z")

</div>

Not really; in fact the only reason I got the ti4600 over the ti500 was for dual head support.  
The geforce3 is a very fast chip; and yes it is faster than geforce4MX but not faster than the ti series.  
the geforce3 and 4 both support the same openGL features; the main difference between the 2; is that the gf4 has an extra pixel shader.  
No real function by which a 3d app will benifit; other than a higher clock speed and more RAM.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@skelter](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/skelter)
#### Post date: [August 29, 2002, 3:48pm UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/6 "2002-08-29T15:48:11Z")

</div>

I disagree because all benchmarks i've seen point the fact that the GF2 familly is faster than GF3Quadro DCC in pro OpengL apps.  
I think the OpenGL in GF4 is stronger than GF2 or 3 plus it run at higher speed so logically the GF4 mx, ti or wathever is speeder than GF3 under Maya.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![grocs](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/b487fb/32.png) [@grocs](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/grocs)
#### Post date: [August 30, 2002, 3:04am UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/7 "2002-08-30T03:04:06Z")

</div>

gf4 mx is as slow as as gf 2 ti under softquadro and rivatuner... out of choice I would either go for a Softquadro`d GF3 Ti500 or a GF4 Ti4600 if you have money to waste or a gf4ti4400 or gf4ti4200 if you don`t mind over clocking and you`ll probably get a bit more speed than the SQ`d gf3 ![](http://64.32.63.100/forums/icons/laugh.gif)

OC`ing can be good because by the time you`ve burn`t out your card in about 2 years or less time you`ll probably have already bought a new one anyway.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![1000101-](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/1/3be4f8/32.png) [@1000101-](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/1000101-)
#### Post date: [August 30, 2002, 4:28pm UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/8 "2002-08-30T16:28:20Z")

</div>

In the initial release of the drivers yes; the gf2 ultra did in fact outperform a geforce3. However with driver revisions fixing many of the initial issues; the geforce3 moved back into the lead.  
Another side note; no new openGL extensions were added to the geforce4 Ti. And the geforce4 MX series has less than the geforce3.   
On a side note; you can also hack geforce3 drivers to behave like a quadro DCC which is significantly faster than the geforce4 MX in professional openGL applications.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![jaredfromsubway](https://forum.highend3d.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/b4bc9f/32.png) [@jaredfromsubway](https://forum.highend3d.com/u/jaredfromsubway)
#### Post date: [September 4, 2002, 4:16am UTC](https://forum.highend3d.com/t/geforce-4-vs-3/69990/9 "2002-09-04T04:16:41Z")

</div>

Right only here to tell u that for about the same price u could get a Geforce 4 ti4200 which is much better than a geforce 3

around
