Printable View
Is the GeForce2 MX able to achieve GTS performance? If so is it an overclock and or tweak as in the Radeon LEs case, or is it something like what you have to do to change a GTS to a Quadro?
How far is an MX off of GTS performance, I have not heard of any one taking on to GTS speeds.
------------------
Too bad, my dumb motherboard fried just about everything. Waiting for Tbird 900, FIC AD11 (AMD 761 DDR), 128 PC2100 DDR, GeForce2 MX! YEAH!
Check out this awesome website: Extreme-Genesis
It's simply not possible to take it that high. The MX only has half the fillrate and I doubt you can overclock it 100%.
------------------
Tweak your Radeon. Get Raid on Tweaker here
He doesnt have to.If doubleing the fillrate meant doubling the speed.a GTS would be twice as fast as the MX.Quote:
Originally posted by Humus:
It's simply not possible to take it that high. The MX only has half the fillrate and I doubt you can overclock it 100%.
The GTS is only 25% faster in most cases and thats easy to get out of a MX.
It depends on how far the ram will go mainly.
I was lucky with my GF256. it has 5ns(200Mhz)ram for a card that comes clocked at 120/166.
It can run fine 210 all day long for a nice 10% boost in performance,clocking the core does little on a card so mem limmited and only gets 3-5% if im lucky.
Then the drivers gave me another huge boost.Going from CD drivers to 6.50 gave me a nice 10% more again.Then i got NVmax2 Beta.
This is a very good NV tweaker(requires 6.50 or later drivers.It allowed me to enable 2xAGP(which i couldnt do b4),side band adressing(same),and it has a few good fixes for known issues with a few chipset types.
Also more settings to get better performance like enable texture compression,and a few others.NVmax and the NVregfix boosted my performance another 10%.
By now i was getting 5800 3D2k marks and that was all i could think of.then i tried 7.78 divers,and guess what?6187.another damn 6%. Im thinking"whens this going to end?
after that i tried 12.0 drivers,but it dropped back to 5800 so i think 7.78's are the best.I think the extra speed in the 7.78's comes from a decrease in quality as the bumpmapping test looked a little grainier.
So there ya go.30% out a a GF256,heh over 30 actually but its quite comfortable running 30%over.
Im getting higher scores now in 32bit than i used to get in 16.
But then,Any card can do the same thing.The GTS could reach Ultra speeds if it has fast enough ram and a bigger cooler.
My GF256 SDR with Hacked up P200 cooler
https://www.sharkyforums.com/
------------------
"Clockit tillya Cookit"
- Slot T Bird 700@833,1.75v
- MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled VIA KILLER
- 300w power,265Mb PC133 cas3@119 cas2
- ASUS V6600 Pure GF256 SDR 120/166 top speed 166/217
NV 7.78'sNVMax2Beta,2xAGP,SBA enabled ATI KILLER https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/6.gif- WD 20Gb, Creative Live value, LG CD-RW 2Mb,Win98 SE
- 6187 3D2k (default bench)833 164/216
- 4502 3D2k (1024x768-32)833 164/216
- 2572 3D2k1 (default bench)833 164/216
- MDK2 max 1024x768-16=105fps,-32=72,640x480-16=120
[This message has been edited by GB_Cobber (edited May 27, 2001).]
I just upgraded from a VisionTek GeForce2 MX card to a ASUS V7700 GeForce2 GTS (32MB).
It was REAL NICE to turn 32bit texture and color on and play at 1024 x 768. I always was droping back to 16bit and 800x600 on the MX to get decent play.
Plus, now I have S-Video in/out which is pretty cool too.
Ankl
------------------
ASUS A7V133 (bios 1004) w/Tbird 1.2Ghz @ 266FSB
Kingston ValueRAM 256MB+64MB PC133
ASUS V7700 Deluxe
Viewsonic PF790
Intellimouse Optical
IBM 30GB + 16GB Internal
At 1024X768X32bit + the GTS is 100%+ faster the MX sucks its a good upgrade from a TNT2 or geforce 256 sdr but not much more http://dev.www.sharkyforums.forums.relay.cool/Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
He doesnt have to.If doubleing the fillrate meant doubling the speed.a GTS would be twice as fast as the MX.
The GTS is only 25% faster in most cases and thats easy to get out of a MX.
It depends on how far the ram will go mainly.
I was lucky with my GF256. it has 5ns(200Mhz)ram for a card that comes clocked at 120/166.
It can run fine 210 all day long for a nice 10% boost in performance,clocking the core does little on a card so mem limmited and only gets 3-5% if im lucky.
Then the drivers gave me another huge boost.Going from CD drivers to 6.50 gave me a nice 10% more again.Then i got NVmax2 Beta.
This is a very good NV tweaker(requires 6.50 or later drivers.It allowed me to enable 2xAGP(which i couldnt do b4),side band adressing(same),and it has a few good fixes for known issues with a few chipset types.
Also more settings to get better performance like enable texture compression,and a few others.NVmax and the NVregfix boosted my performance another 10%.
By now i was getting 5800 3D2k marks and that was all i could think of.then i tried 7.78 divers,and guess what?6187.another damn 6%. Im thinking"whens this going to end?
after that i tried 12.0 drivers,but it dropped back to 5800 so i think 7.78's are the best.I think the extra speed in the 7.78's comes from a decrease in quality as the bumpmapping test looked a little grainier.
So there ya go.30% out a a GF256,heh over 30 actually but its quite comfortable running 30%over.
Im getting higher scores now in 32bit than i used to get in 16.
But then,Any card can do the same thing.The GTS could reach Ultra speeds if it has fast enough ram and a bigger cooler.
My GF256 SDR with Hacked up P200 cooler
https://www.sharkyforums.com/
------------------
INTEL Pentium 3 600E @ 850mhz
MSI BX Master!
512megs pc100 cas2 @ 141mhz cas3
Rade0n 64meg DDR w/vivo
Sound Blaster Live!
toshiba 16X DvD
Sony 12X8X32
Atlas 18 gig SCSI
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
INTEL 10/100 NIC
21" sony trinatron
Nevermind...
------------------
My computer's spec:
Custom-made b!tch
Asus i815E CUSL2-M, GOT Asus A7V133, waiting for my chip
PC133 2-2-2 5T,7T. Mem capable of PC166 3-2-2
1GHz PIII, soon a 1.33GHz AXIA T-Bird, ETA next Tues.
Extra Duron for testing, ETA next Friday.
Visiontek GeForce3 (can't oc cus of Win2000 Coolbit bug)
SoundBlaster Live! X-Gamer 5.1
Acer 16X DVD and 16x/10x/40x Lite-on CDRW, soon be replaced by Plextor (it's here already, need a stronger PSU)
Microsoft Internet Keyboard Pro
Zip250 USB (not USB-powered)
Logitech Mouse Optical
20GB Maxtor 5400rpm ATA-100, and soon an addition of 40GB WD 7200RPM ATA-100
TEAC Floppy
WBK38 Cooler
Overclockerz Store custom-made case (Implosion-900 w/ 570 cfm of air) w/ 300W PSU, soon be replaced by 650W Enermax PSU
19" Dell monitor
CanoScan N650 U
Windows 2000 Professional.
I'm 14 and is a happy goldfish.
http://www.angelfire.com/ct2/chencchris/specs.htm
[This message has been edited by ChencChris (edited May 27, 2001).]
Cough Cough.Omg.You sure that not a typo?Quote:
Originally posted by Newbie-Overclocker:
At 1024X768X32bit + the GTS is 100%+ faster the MX sucks its a good upgrade from a TNT2 or geforce 256 sdr but not much more http://dev.www.sharkyforums.forums.relay.cool/
I dont know where u get your scores from, but a GTS is no way more than 35% faster than a half decent MX in 1024x768-32
If what u say is true, the GTS would even beat a readon DDR by at least 25%. Id like to see that benchmark so i can stick it full of holes. I'll concede the gts might get 100% better in a mem bandwidth test but we dont play tests. we play games.No GTS will ever go faster in 32 bit than my GF256 does in 16 and mine drops about 25% going from 16 to 32 bit.Hell,my 256 can beat up most readon DDR's in 16 bit as can any good MX.
Plz save the speculation for those who dont know any better.
------------------
                             "Clockit tillya Cookit"
- Slot T Bird 700@833,1.75v
- MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled VIA KILLER
- 300w power,265Mb PC133 cas3@119 cas2
- ASUS V6600 Pure GF256 SDR 120/166 top speed 166/217
NV 7.78'sNVMax2Beta,2xAGP,SBA enabled ATI KILLER ;)- WD 20Gb, Creative Live value, LG CD-RW 2Mb,Win98 SE
- 6187 3D2k (default bench)833 164/216
- 4502 3D2k (1024x768-32)833 164/216
- 2572 3D2k1 (default bench)833 164/216
- MDK2 max 1024x768-16=105fps,-32=72,640x480-16=120
hehehe.......... It's INSANE to compare an mx to a GTS, sorry folks my experience doesn't 'buy' the argument. An mx is only half, how you gonna compare 2 pipelines to 4 ?
I'll tell ya my perception, that is my old Herc gf2mx is of no comparison at all to my current sample of a GTS, even makes me lol to think about the suggestion https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
AND in 1028x32 ?
hehehehehehehe https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
sorry
------------------
pIII 850, Soyo SY-6BA+100, 425w psu, 512m Corsair RAM, Maxtor HDD's {RAID}, Abit Siluro GF2 64m w/12.40 drvs., Hercules Game TheaterXP w/Monsoon MM-700's {2 sets}, Logitech Goodness.
Man, ive surfed Mad onion's 3d2k and 3D2k1 data bases long enough to know that the fastest MX's are only 25% slower than the fastest GTS'sQuote:
Originally posted by Gunner:
hehehe.......... It's INSANE to compare an mx to a GTS, sorry folks my experience doesn't 'buy' the argument. An mx is only half, how you gonna compare 2 pipelines to 4 ?
I'll tell ya my perception, that is my old Herc gf2mx is of no comparison at all to my current sample of a GTS, even makes me lol to think about the suggestion https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
AND in 1028x32 ?
hehehehehehehe https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
sorry
I realize that the MX's SDR ir faster and overclocks higher that the GTS's DDR ram so the stock gap is wider, but in overall performance the GTS stock speeds are easily reached by overcl;ocking a good MX. take a look for yourself https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
------------------
                             "Clockit tillya Cookit"
- Slot T Bird 700@833,1.75v
- MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled VIA KILLER
- 300w power,265Mb PC133 cas3@119 cas2
- ASUS V6600 Pure GF256 SDR 120/166 top speed 166/217
NV 7.78'sNVMax2Beta,2xAGP,SBA enabled ATI KILLER ;)- WD 20Gb, Creative Live value, LG CD-RW 2Mb,Win98 SE
- 6187 3D2k (default bench)833 164/216
- 4502 3D2k (1024x768-32)833 164/216
- 2572 3D2k1 (default bench)833 164/216
- MDK2 max 1024x768-16=105fps,-32=72,640x480-16=120
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardwar..._2_mx/10.shtml
32 bit means memory limited at most resolutions, so the MX is ~1/2 as fast as a GTS at stock speed (166SDR vs 166DDR), but the real world difference is less. (DDR is not as efficient as SDR, or whatever)
both cards are GF2s, i don't think buying the same product twice is very cost efficient, so i believe waiting a few months until GF3 Ultra is out and the normal GF3 drops in price is the way to go.
------------------
If the world did not suck, we all would fall off.
That MX is beaten by the GF256 in half of the tests https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gifQuote:
Originally posted by Captain Iglo:
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardwar..._2_mx/10.shtml
32 bit means memory limited at most resolutions, so the MX is ~1/2 as fast as a GTS at stock speed (166SDR vs 166DDR), but the real world difference is less. (DDR is not as efficient as SDR, or whatever)
both cards are GF2s, i don't think buying the same product twice is very cost efficient, so i believe waiting a few months until GF3 Ultra is out and the normal GF3 drops in price is the way to go.
The GTS holds a 25-30% lead in all the tests at 1024x768 and under.
The Herc MX tested only uses 5.5ns SDRAm,so it may never reach the speeds that those using 5ns SGRAM can.
Tell ya what.take that GTS to madonion.cam and see if it can beat my GF256 scores.
That should settle all arguments https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif
------------------
"Clockit tillya Cookit"
- Slot T Bird 700@833,1.75v
- MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled VIA KILLER
- 300w power,265Mb PC133 cas3@119 cas2
- ASUS V6600 Pure GF256 SDR 120/166 top speed 166/217
NV 7.78'sNVMax2Beta,2xAGP,SBA enabled ATI KILLER https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/6.gif- WD 20Gb, Creative Live value, LG CD-RW 2Mb,Win98 SE
- 6187 3D2k (default bench)833 164/216
- 4502 3D2k (1024x768-32)833 164/216
- 2572 3D2k1 (default bench)833 164/216
- MDK2 max 1024x768-16=105fps,-32=72,640x480-16=120
[This message has been edited by GB_Cobber (edited May 28, 2001).]
I'm sorry to say it bud but 3Dmark200/2001 mean nothing at all it dose not evan give close to an idea of how a card can perform in real world.Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
Man, ive surfed Mad onion's 3d2k and 3D2k1 data bases long enough to know that the fastest MX's are only 25% slower than the fastest GTS's
I realize that the MX's SDR ir faster and overclocks higher that the GTS's DDR ram so the stock gap is wider, but in overall performance the GTS stock speeds are easily reached by overcl;ocking a good MX. take a look for yourself https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
3Dmark is a nice tool to see how your system compares to others in that bench but it means nothing more.
I see u have a good score for your SDR now if u were to compare that card to a 256 DDR MX or GTS in real-world benches like UT quake3 CS Mdk2 giants B&W your card would die,My old Asus geforce 2 GTS used to score 3800 in 3dmark2000 useing the Asus 533a drivers yet in games like Q3 my card was faster then most GTS cards,Thats just an example of how 3Dmark2000 cant give real-world performance.
I think everyone here agrees that 3dmark like Sisoft Sandra means nothing in real world performance.
------------------
INTEL Pentium 3 600E @ 850mhz
MSI BX Master!
512megs pc100 cas2 @ 141mhz cas3
Rade0n 64meg DDR w/vivo
Sound Blaster Live!
toshiba 16X DvD
Sony 12X8X32
Atlas 18 gig SCSI
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
INTEL 10/100 NIC
21" sony trinatron
http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardwar..._2_mx/11.shtmlQuote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
That MX is beaten by the GF256 in half of the tests https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
The Geforce 2 MX loses to the SDR by 1-5fps and the card was only getting like 20fps! so what if the 256 wins it still dosent give playable fps!
------------------
INTEL Pentium 3 600E @ 850mhz
MSI BX Master!
512megs pc100 cas2 @ 141mhz cas3
Rade0n 64meg DDR w/vivo
Sound Blaster Live!
toshiba 16X DvD
Sony 12X8X32
Atlas 18 gig SCSI
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
INTEL 10/100 NIC
21" sony trinatron
yeah,the 256 mostly wins at 1200 or 1600 res, but its still close at 1024 or 800x600.Quote:
Originally posted by Newbie-Overclocker:
[URL=http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/reviews/video/herculese_3d_prophet_2_mx/11.shtml]http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/reviews/video/herculese_3d_prophet_2_mx/11.shtml[/ URL]Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
That MX is beaten by the GF256 in half of the tests https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
The Geforce 2 MX loses to the SDR by 1-5fps and the card was only getting like 20fps! so what if the 256 wins it still dosent give playable fps!
and with a nice Gpu cooler and 5ns ram. the MX or 256 can make up a good 25-30% so one can in fact reach GTS speeds at 1024x768.
thats all im tying to say. will you all stop telling me that what i have actually done is impossible? https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
------------------
                             "Clockit tillya Cookit"
- Slot T Bird 700@833,1.75v
- MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled VIA KILLER
- 300w power,265Mb PC133 cas3@119 cas2
- ASUS V6600 Pure GF256 SDR 120/166 top speed 166/217
NV 7.78'sNVMax2Beta,2xAGP,SBA enabled ATI KILLER ;)- WD 20Gb, Creative Live value, LG CD-RW 2Mb,Win98 SE
- 6187 3D2k (default bench)833 164/216
- 4502 3D2k (1024x768-32)833 164/216
- 2572 3D2k1 (default bench)833 164/216
- MDK2 max 1024x768-16=105fps,-32=72,640x480-16=120
Quote:
Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
yeah,the 256 mostly wins at 1200 or 1600 res, but its still close at 1024 or 800x600.
and with a nice Gpu cooler and 5ns ram. the MX or 256 can make up a good 25-30% so one can in fact reach GTS speeds at 1024x768.
thats all im tying to say. will you all stop telling me that what i have actually done is impossible? https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif
Your 256 is not as fast or close to a GTS and no a MX cannot gain 25%+ thats impossible, Evan if some one did reach GTS speeds it dose not matter because most GTS cards can be clocked to 250/390, I once owned a Geforce SDR I got the card when it first came out and it was NOT that much faster then a TnT2 ultra, In this http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1453&p=6 we see the GTS almost perform up to 100% faster then a MX 400 since the MX400 is faster then all SDR cards overall that say alot for your card,If u manage to overclock your card and get another 25% performance gain your still atleast 75% slower then a GTS,I would also like to remind u a GTS can be overclocked aswell and gain upto 20% atleast from what I have DONE, I think its stupid that u try and campare your 256 64meg SDR to a GTS 32meg because the GTS will win @ def clock in every test u can imagine,I bet the MX @ def clock would put up more then a good fight vs your overclock SDR anyday.
The only way your ganna make your card faster then a MX or GTS is if u replace the SDR ram with some 200mhz DDR ram https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif
BTW I don't care about 3Dmark200 because it isnt a real world benchmark.
------------------
INTEL Pentium 3 600E @ 850mhz
MSI BX Master!
512megs pc100 cas2 @ 141mhz cas3
Rade0n 64meg DDR w/vivo
Sound Blaster Live!
toshiba 16X DvD
Sony 12X8X32
Atlas 18 gig SCSI
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
IBM 45gig DeskSTAR
INTEL 10/100 NIC
21" sony trinatron
[This message has been edited by Newbie-Overclocker (edited May 28, 2001).]