Geforce4 MX 440 vs GMA 950

Out of curiosity, which is better in terms of performance? Would it be the 950?

 

No, the Geforce4 MX 440 is still older, but still owns the 950.

The GMA 950 and 900 suck.

 

I think the only advantage of the GMA950 over the MX 440 is its Dx9 capabilities but still, pretty bad for playing any newer games.

 

GMA 950 is better on paper.
GMA - 1600Mpixels/sec
MX440 - 500Mpixels/sec

However, the drivers of the GMA let it down, since there are a LOT of games that simply cannot be played on a GMA. Likewise, there are many titles now that cannot play on a MX440 since it lacks pixel shader support.

Assuming that you are older titles the GMA 950 would be a better choice (providing the games are compatible of course). Even though a lot is made about the GMA not having hardware TnL, with older games this shouldn't pose a problem since processors are a lot more powerful now than when the MX440 was released. A Pentium M/Core2/Turion etc should be able to cope with ease with anything the Quake 3 engine or the like can throw at it.

 

In games which still support DX7 generation cards like the GeForce4 MX, it would definitely be faster than the GMA 950. However, that's because the GMA 950 would be running using DX9 code which is a lot more difficult. I wonder has anyone tried running a GMA 950 in games using DX8 or even DX7 mode? A modern CPU, especially a dual core like the GMA 950 is usually paired with, should be able to run T&L calculations very well, so I would think performance of a GMA 950 in DX7 mode, which may be perceived as a more fair comparison with the GeForce4 MX, should be pretty good.

When the GMA 950 chokes, it's not the IGP itself since the 4 PS seem to actually be pretty efficient, it's just the CPU can't process enough VS in addition to the T&L to keep the IGP fed. The GMA 950 may perform acceptibly if DX8 mode is forced since the shorter, simpler VS code may allow the CPU to cope better.

In any case, I think the GMA 950 is a better choice since you can play (slightly) newer games at lower settings of course or you could try to force a lower shader mode to let it run faster.

I'm curious as to the circumstances of your decision though? You can't really upgrade to the GMA 950 since it's built-into the system, and the GeForce4 MX isn't exactly an upgrade part either. If this is a trade-off between 2 systems, the GMA 950 system would probably be better in the end anyways because the other components making the overall system faster. Even hard drives are quite a bit faster now than 4 years ago when the GeForce4 MX was new.

 

I believe the GFMX card he has is on a desktop he has, however he is looking into getting a notebook so I guess he wants to use his GF4MX as a benchmark for laptop graphics.

I agree with your point on the GMA950 running DX9 code. I was trying to find some benchmarks of the gma 950 in action, they look unimpressive but I wonder what fps improvements you would get over dropping down to DX8 mode. I'm tempted to check out my X1300 in HL2, to see what fps increase i get (if any of course) by dropping down to DX8, 7 etc. In fact, I might go give it a go now.

 

Well here's Anandtech's comparison between DX9 and DX8 mode in HL2.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2281&p=3

At 800x600, the X300SE which is probably the reference point for the GMA 950, gains 15.8% going to DX8. At 1024x768, the X300SE gains 20%. That's probably enough to move the GMA 950 from not playable/barely playable to playable, which is sufficient for an IGP. Intel's released 3 driver updates in the last 4 months, to better support the GMA 3000 and X3000, but perhaps there's probably improvements to the GMA 950 too. The GMA 3000 is basically an overclocked GMA 950 anyways, so I'm many of the improvements will be interchangable.

On a side note, looking at that old HL2 comparison, makes me feel sorry for those 5900XT owners. Even the X300SE beats the 5900XT in DX9 mode. Also, the GeForce4 MX puts out very impressive scores in HL2 since it's running in DX7 mode.

 

I have made this test almost exactly using a very old 32 mb mx 420 laptop and a e1705 with gma 950

in games such as vampire bloodlines the mx 420 works and the 950 is a slideshow.

its not even close.

 

The problem with an Intel integrated graphics card is that they cannot hold a stable framerate, which is what determines playability in my opinion. The GF 4MX is capable of running older DX7 games (since that is all it supports) as posted just fine. I used to have the mobile version in my old laptop.

If you are looking to upgrade to a new computer and want to be able to play games, then by all means, skip integrated. We can recommend a computer to you if you complete the FAQ in the What Should I Buy forum.

 

Well, I was going to run the Source Video Stress Test, but it keeps crashing. Methinks I better revert to Cat 6.8s, I have heard bad things about these 6.10s, it seems those thing were right. Boooooo!

 

Well Vampire Bloodlines uses the Source engine so it's results would be similar to HL2. The GeForce4 MX uses DX7 code so it'll put out good FPS like the Anandtech comparison shows, while the GMA 950 can't handle the complexity in DX9 mode.

 

the g4 mx was very slow also I would point out. but the 950 was not slow it was not functioning to the point where the game could be played.