GeForce4 MX 440 AGP8X @ 1920x1080?

T

toronado455

n00b
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
51
Does anyone know how to get the GeForce4 MX 440 AGP8X to run 1920 x 1080 mode?

I have the NVIDIA Control Panel Version 1.0.2.82 installed and it's not showing that mode as available, though I thought this card could do that mode.
 
hmm i wanna say it doesn't support that rez but don't quote me on that


edit: it def supports that rez try installing the newest drivers or changing it through windows instead of nvidia control panel
 
You might try using something like powerstrip to try a custom resolution.

But the Geforce4 MX is a very old videocard, based on the Geforce 2.
 
Thanks for the quick replies.

I got it running at 1920x1080 just now by rolling back the driver in Windows Device Manager. It's now at Version 5.6.7.3 Driver Date 4/7/2004

Not sure what's going on with the newer driver and why it wont run this mode as I can see now that the video card is capable of it, just only using the older driver.
 
The drivers past 60.xx drop the hardware assisted Vertex shaders, too. (iirc, it's around there).
 
Just noticed another problem. Everytime I reboot it goes back to my old setting of 1280x1024. (I just got a new monitor that runs 1920x1080 and my old monitor was 1280x1024)

After I reboot, I can then go into the display properties and change it to 1920x1080, but still... seems weird. I wonder if a clean install of Windows XP (with it sensing this new monitor at install time) would fix that?
 
Back in the day, I used to take the nVidia drivers and extract them to a separate folder. From there, I'd edit the install ini (can't remember the exact file name) and insert the resolution along with refresh rate and a couple of other variables.
 
"sensing new monitor at install time" -> no

uninstall the nVidia drivers entirely (as it sounds like something is mucked up, no this isn't required every time you get a new monitor, it just sounds like something in your case is mucked up), install them again, and you should be good to go

GF4 can surely support 1080p, it just might take enabling a custom resolution (as has been suggested), or using a version of drivers other than the latest ForceWare from nVidia (which is gonna be like 174.x afaik (thats what GF-FX ended with))

another option might to be see if theres a driver available for your monitor (all it'll do is give the system more accurate information about the resolution/refresh/color depth abilities of the display)
 
Check to be sure you have the proper drivers for your monitor. "Default Monitor" may not allow full resolution options.

Driver 56.73 is the most appropriate for that card (assuming WinXP) if you're not gaming. Not that anything recent requiring newer drivers would even run on an MX440... it's still fine for surfing and MS Word.
 
wow, interesting...

I still have a PowerColor GF4 440MX, 64Mb, 8X AGP in my collection.

Just the other day, I was shuffling through my cards, looking for a suitable card to give a friend as a freebie.
He needed an upgrade for an old P4 system to which he just added a widescreen LCD. So, I needed something good enough to do 1680 X 1050, but not something that was overkill, since he doesn't game.

Anyway, I picked up the GF4, laughed, and thought, "yeah right! this card would never support hi-res"

Guess I was wrong!! LOL
 
wjogert said:
wow, interesting...

I still have a PowerColor GF4 440MX, 64Mb, 8X AGP in my collection.

Just the other day, I was shuffling through my cards, looking for a suitable card to give a friend as a freebie.
He needed an upgrade for an old P4 system to which he just added a widescreen LCD. So, I needed something good enough to do 1680 X 1050, but not something that was overkill, since he doesn't game.

Anyway, I picked up the GF4, laughed, and thought, "yeah right! this card would never support hi-res"

Guess I was wrong!! LOL
Click to expand...

2048x1536 out via VGA
anything lower still counts

again, the notion that you need "64 CUDA cores" or something like that (the marketing fluff) in order to handle anything above 800x600, its more or less a matter of available memory, and at 32MB you're basically good to go
 
toronado455 said:
Just noticed another problem. Everytime I reboot it goes back to my old setting of 1280x1024. (I just got a new monitor that runs 1920x1080 and my old monitor was 1280x1024)

After I reboot, I can then go into the display properties and change it to 1920x1080, but still... seems weird. I wonder if a clean install of Windows XP (with it sensing this new monitor at install time) would fix that?
Click to expand...

Yes, this was a bug that used to happen in some os. I forget which version of Windows did this, but, one of the solutions was to start the machine with no monitor connected. Let it boot up fully until you think its at your 'enter your password/login screen' or at your desktop. Then press the power button once. Hitting the power button once should start the proper shut down sequence. Once its off(just let it shut down normally), start your computer again(with no monitor still) and this time after the pc has fully booted, connect your monitor. Change settings, restart and your settings should remain.

I know, its a pain-in-the-butt to do this method but its the only way I could get my monitor resolution to change when I changed from a 15" CRT to a 19" viewsonic crt back in 1999ish on Windows 98/xp ish?
 
WBurchnall said:
Yes, this was a bug that used to happen in some os. I forget which version of Windows did this, but, one of the solutions was to start the machine with no monitor connected. Let it boot up fully until you think its at your 'enter your password/login screen' or at your desktop. Then press the power button once. Hitting the power button once should start the proper shut down sequence. Once its off(just let it shut down normally), start your computer again(with no monitor still) and this time after the pc has fully booted, connect your monitor. Change settings, restart and your settings should remain.

I know, its a pain-in-the-butt to do this method but its the only way I could get my monitor resolution to change when I changed from a 15" CRT to a 19" viewsonic crt back in 1999ish on Windows 98/xp ish?
Click to expand...


I wouldn't mind doing this except that I don't like the idea of plugging in the DVI cable to the PC while either is powered on. Or did you mean leave the monitor powered off and connect the cable (after second PC full reboot) and then power on the monitor?
 
obobski said:
"sensing new monitor at install time" -> no

uninstall the nVidia drivers entirely (as it sounds like something is mucked up, no this isn't required every time you get a new monitor, it just sounds like something in your case is mucked up), install them again, and you should be good to go

GF4 can surely support 1080p, it just might take enabling a custom resolution (as has been suggested), or using a version of drivers other than the latest ForceWare from nVidia (which is gonna be like 174.x afaik (thats what GF-FX ended with))

another option might to be see if theres a driver available for your monitor (all it'll do is give the system more accurate information about the resolution/refresh/color depth abilities of the display)
Click to expand...

This is what I had installed and it wouldn't run 1920x1080 mode:
ForceWare Release 90
Version: 93.71 WHQL
Release Date: November 2, 2006
Operating System: Windows 2000, XP, Media Center Edition
Language: U.S. English
File Size: 40.5 MB
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_93.71_2.html
The ForceWare Release 90 Version: 93.71 is what you get if you look up the driver for the GeForce4 MX 440 with AGP8X on the nVidia website.

I rolled it back in Windows Device Manager and it's now at Driver Version 5.6.7.3, Date 4/7/2004. This version works at 1920x1080, except that Windows resets my resolution to the old 1280x1024 at boot time. Windows says that the driver provider is nVidia. Are you saying that I can completely uninstall ALL nVidia drivers somehow and use a Windows driver?

There is a Samsung driver, which I downloaded and installed, but maybe I didn't install it properly because I just ran the exe file and it said it installed it but I don't see it anywhere.
 
Last edited:
I remember having drivers newer than that with ForceWare for my GF4's in ~2007

so perhaps they're giving you a cripled driver to encourage you to buy more crap?

check Guru3D's driver download archive, should have like every nVidia driver since Reactor ~52
 
Past about ForceWare 60.xx, nVidia removed the 'Hardware Assisted software vertex shaders,' dunno if you care about that, but I used to.

(for the MX440 go, at any rate. It was also true for the desktop systems, though I am unsure of the exact forceware revision, anymore).
 
Still haven't figured out how to get Windows to boot in 1920x1080 mode. It always boots in 1280x1024 then I have to change it to 1920x1080.

It seems like there must be some file somewhere where this info is stored. If I could just edit the file...
 
obobski said:
2048x1536 out via VGA
anything lower still counts

again, the notion that you need "64 CUDA cores" or something like that (the marketing fluff) in order to handle anything above 800x600, its more or less a matter of available memory, and at 32MB you're basically good to go
Click to expand...
If all you are doing is 2d graphics, even 32MB is more than you really need. Of course gaming is another issue...
 
siliconnerd said:
If all you are doing is 2d graphics, even 32MB is more than you really need. Of course gaming is another issue...
Click to expand...

less than 32MB and you start getting into issues driving the upper limits of resolution at full depth at >100hz, honestly, in 2009, I don't wanna be dealing with a card that can do 2048x1536 max, assuming its set to 16 or 24-bit color and 65-75hz

32MB is a good bottom end for a catch-all
yeah 8 or 16MB is probably fine for lower resolutions (hell 2MB is fine depending on what you're driving with it), I just don't like to impose unncessary limits (and usually a 32-64MB card with a ~10 year old GPU is gonna cost about the same as whatever 2-16MB 15-20 year old card (like $5 or less), and have generally more stable/relevant drivers (a lot of ancient hardware won't support Windows XP, god forbid Vista or 7))

as far as gaming or actual 3D rendering, well thats JMOD

if you're buying new hardware, don't go for extra features if they aren't gonna be used, but don't buy the absolute cheapest thing (for example if you can get a GF 6200 for $29.99, and a GF 8600GT for $34.99, get the 8600, its considerably faster))
 
Last edited:
Sorry to bring back this month old thread. I am running into the similar problem. I want to use the "latest" driver. i.e. 2007. But after installation, I don't see 1920x1080. The highest it will go is 1440x900. The existing driver - dated 2003 - is offered by XP after searching its online databas, works fine with 1920x1080. But I wonder if I get better performance with newer driver. Right now, watching SD video at full resolution is kind of choppy.
 
Last edited:
the driver shouldn't influence that too much, as even the 2005 drivers probably weren't making any optimizations for GF4

are you sure your issue isn't a lack of an .inf file for the monitor? (so the driver is preventing 1920x1080 because it "thinks" the monitor can't support that mode)
 
obobski said:
the driver shouldn't influence that too much, as even the 2005 drivers probably weren't making any optimizations for GF4

are you sure your issue isn't a lack of an .inf file for the monitor? (so the driver is preventing 1920x1080 because it "thinks" the monitor can't support that mode)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. But 1920x1080 was available before installing driver from nvidia. Could the resolution be "lost"? Also I got an error from NvCpl.dll in the end of the install. I forgot the exact error message.
 
Damn dude, just pony up $60.00 for a decent video card made within the last 2 years. All this headache to get an old card to do what it doesn't want to do just isn't worth the time/effort, IMO.
 
AirCool said:
I'm not sure. But 1920x1080 was available before installing driver from nvidia. Could the resolution be "lost"? Also I got an error from NvCpl.dll in the end of the install. I forgot the exact error message.
Click to expand...

well if you've got a .dll error, re-DL and re-install

guru3d should still have archived nV drivers back to when it was still called Detonator, could try that out
 
toronado455 said:
I wouldn't mind doing this except that I don't like the idea of plugging in the DVI cable to the PC while either is powered on. Or did you mean leave the monitor powered off and connect the cable (after second PC full reboot) and then power on the monitor?
Click to expand...

You're not going to hurt anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top