GeForce256 or MX

[Abit400]

Ok, see the system in my sig? Well everything is dead except for the PCI cards, HD and CDROM.
I know what I am doing for the rest of the computer, but I am stuck on a video card. Should I get a GeForce256 32mb SDR or a GeForce2 MX? They are both the same price. I cannot even bother with a Radeon (even LE) because they are too expensive, even though I really really want one.


------------------
PIII667/133@667, Abit BE6, 128PC100@133, TNT1 16mb, IBM 14.4 7200 HD, Netgear FA310TX, 56k modem, Aureal Vortex2 SQ2500, Sony 2x4x24 burner and other USB stuff.
Check out this awesome website: Extreme-Genesis

[AMD_Forever]

Originally posted by Abit400:
Ok, see the system in my sig? Well everything is dead except for the PCI cards, HD and CDROM.
I know what I am doing for the rest of the computer, but I am stuck on a video card. Should I get a GeForce256 32mb SDR or a GeForce2 MX? They are both the same price. I cannot even bother with a Radeon (even LE) because they are too expensive, even though I really really want one.

A GF2 MX will outrun a GF1 SDR.

If the GF1 were DDR, then it would win.

[GB_Cobber]

Originally posted by Abit400:
Ok, see the system in my sig? Well everything is dead except for the PCI cards, HD and CDROM.
I know what I am doing for the rest of the computer, but I am stuck on a video card. Should I get a GeForce256 32mb SDR or a GeForce2 MX? They are both the same price. I cannot even bother with a Radeon (even LE) because they are too expensive, even though I really really want one.

Yup. The last guy's dead right. MX is faster. but 256 DDR would beat it.

MX comes clocked at 175/166 as oposed to the 256's 120/166.
Its also made on the 0.18 micron die as opposed the 0.25 for the 256,therefore it runs cooler, more effecienttly and can reach higher clockspeed.

The important thing with any 256 or MX is to find one with the best ram,ie my GF256 uses 5 ns SGRAM.(the chip has -5 on it so from that im assuming its 5 ns.i would have thought that 5 ns could get higher than 218mhz,but im not sure).

I believe the leadtech MX SH Pro runs at 200/200 straight out of the box and has been spotted soaring as high as 234/245.

Thats just unbeatable,although it may not be worth the extra money with so many cheap GTS's floating around now.

And most importantly, make sure it uses the 128 bit memory controller,the MX200 and some some cheaper versions of the standard MX and 256 use a reduced 64 bit memory path,thse cards are for the TNT market, DONT buy one.

if the 2 cards you are looking use the same quality ram,take the MX.
If the 256 uses SGRAM and the MX uses SDRAM,u may get more overclocking and slightly higher performance from SGRAM in general.The cpu increase in the MX may not make up for the loss in ram performance as in the 256 arcitecture,Ram is everything.

the 256 would deffinitly need a bigger cooler right from the word go, they just run too damn hot.mine has a customized p200 cpu cooler attacthed.Slight overkill,but it works great sometimes it actually seem like it has to warm up for awhile like a car engine, to achive best results .

So there ya go. take the one with the best ram or if u dont want cooling hastles, just grag the MX.

oh yeah, and you'll probably need a 300w power supply to run the damn 256

By the way, i just posted my highest 3d 2000 score runnung at 800mhz,164/118 with AMD superbypass enabled and solid with my new ram at lowest latencies.this'l blow u away


Mad Onion 3D Mark 2000 1024x678(default becnch) = 5727 Hehehe. it blew me away.
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752135

------------------
Slot T Bird 700@750
MSI K7Pro 300w PS
196Mb PC100 CAS3
ASUS V6600 GeForce256 SDR SGRAM 120/166,top speed-165/216 v6.50 driver,NVMax2Beta.
WD ATA66 20Gb 7200
Creative Live v
LG CD-RW 2Mb
Cheap TV tuner
Win98 SE
Best ever 5649 3D2000Marks(default benchmark)only had 64mb of cas2 for this one http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1750581
MDK2 Demo max 1024x768-16= 104 fps,32 bit = 76 fps.

[This message has been edited by GB_Cobber (edited May 18, 2001).]

[[AK]Zip]

I would have to say the GeForce2 MX. It runs with a new chip which actually makes it faster than tha first GeForce 256.

------------------
[AK]Zip
www.claneso.org
Let Overclocking set you free...

My Specs:
_________________________
CPU: Amd Athlon Classic 800@900 1.75v (going for 950 and higher)
Motherboard: MSI K7 Pro (MS-6195)
Video Card: GeForce3
Modem: Diamond SuperMax
Sound Card: Aureal A3D Vortex 2
Network Card: Linksys 10/100
Hard Drive: IBM 15gig Ultra DMA/66(7200RPM)
CD-Rom: 50X Sony
Case: Custom Built (350 watt Power Supply)
_________________________
Heatsink:
Idle = 29c
Full Load = 33.7c

Core:
Idle = 33c
Full Load = 38c

[GB_Cobber]

Originally posted by [AK]Zip:
I would have to say the GeForce2 MX. It runs with a new chip which actually makes it faster than tha first GeForce 256.

Good advice and if both had the same spped mem, as i said in my post, take the MX. Remember i also said that memory speed has much more to do with overall speed than does the GPU because the 256 arcitecture is already so memory bottlenecked,

I'd hate to see the guy buy a MX which cant reach the mem speeds of the 256.

I would feel guilty if i advised on the MX so narrow mindedly, and it didnt come up to scratch.

I said it b4 and i'll say it again.Mem speed is everything to a GF.

If the mem speed is as good on the MX. take it.

------------------
"Clockit tillya Cookit"

Slot T Bird 700@750
MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled<(VIA KILLER )
300w power,320Mb PC133 CAS3
ASUS V6600 GeForce256 SDR SGRAM 120/166,top speed-165/216 v6.50 driver,NVMax2Beta.
WD ATA66 20Gb 7200,Creative Live v,LG CD-RW 2Mb,Cheap TV tuner,Win98 SE

Best ever 5727 3D2000Marks(default benchmark)AT 800mhz cpu http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752135
Best ever 5603 3D2000Marks(default benchmark)AT 750mhz cpu http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752293
MDK2 Demo max 1024x768-16= 104 fps,32 bit = 76 fps,640x480-16 = 115 fps(cpu limit)

[This message has been edited by GB_Cobber (edited May 18, 2001).]

[Mandorallen of Molynnr]

Another vote for the Geforce MX here.

From the reviews I've seen the MX is faster than the GF1 SDR in most benchmarks, and doesn't have issues like the GF1 series.

Also, as previously stated, DON'T get the MX 200 - it's basically the Geforce version of the TNT 2 M64. Only has a 64 bit SDR data path as opposed to the normal 128 bit SDR data path offered by the MX 400 and standard MX.

Leadtech makes a good card, as does MSI and Hercules. The Giga-byte MX is also quite good, but only comes with 6ns Samsung memory, which maxes out at around 190 MHz.

------------------
Knight of the OC Crusaders.

Odin, All Father. Powered by INTEL

[GB_Cobber]

Originally posted by Mandorallen of Molynnr:
Another vote for the Geforce MX here.

From the reviews I've seen the MX is faster than the GF1 SDR in most benchmarks, and doesn't have issues like the GF1 series.

Also, as previously stated, DON'T get the MX 200 - it's basically the Geforce version of the TNT 2 M64. Only has a 64 bit SDR data path as opposed to the normal 128 bit SDR data path offered by the MX 400 and standard MX.

Leadtech makes a good card, as does MSI and Hercules. The Giga-byte MX is also quite good, but only comes with 6ns Samsung memory, which maxes out at around 190 MHz.

Thats exactly what im saying
If the choice happens to be between a GF256 that maxes out at 216 and a MX that maxes at 190. the 256 will leave it drowning in its wake.(with a bigger cooler and a 300w power supply) hehe. Naa, even at its default 120 mhz, the extra 26 mhz in the ram will more than make up for the extra 5 fps u might get in the core increase.

Ahh Stuff it all. Just get the MX

------------------
"Clockit tillya Cookit"

Slot T Bird 700@750
MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled<(VIA KILLER )
300w power,320Mb PC133 CAS3
ASUS V6600 GeForce256 SDR SGRAM 120/166,top speed-165/216 v6.50 driver,NVMax2Beta.
WD ATA66 20Gb 7200,Creative Live v,LG CD-RW 2Mb,Cheap TV tuner,Win98 SE

Best ever 2727 3D2000Marks(default benchmark)AT 800mhz cpu
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752135
Best ever 5603 3D2000Marks(default benchmark)AT 750mhz cpu
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752293
Best ever 4009 3D2000Marks(1024x768-32)AT 750mhz cpu
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752316

MDK2 Demo max 1024x768-16= 104 fps,32 bit = 76 fps,640x480-16 = 115 fps(cpu limit)

[Mandorallen of Molynnr]

Originally posted by GB_Cobber:
Thats exactly what im saying
If the choice happens to be between a GF256 that maxes out at 216 and a MX that maxes at 190. the 256 will leave it drowning in its wake.(with a bigger cooler and a 300w power supply) hehe. Naa, even at its default 120 mhz, the extra 26 mhz in the ram will more than make up for the extra 5 fps u might get in the core increase.

Ahh Stuff it all. Just get the MX

Agreed, but I think that I'd take a slower MX, don't you need a lot of case cooling with that SDR? Anyways, I'm getting memsinks tomorrow, so I'll try them on my card over the weekend. Hopefully I'll break 200.

Owning a next generation card, even if it is slightly slower is nicer, you won't have as many issues and it should have better resale value (maybe?)

<edit> BTW I mean to say it a lot but very nice job on your SDR! It's definetly in a class of it's own. </edit>

------------------
Knight of the OC Crusaders.

Odin, All Father. Powered by INTEL

[This message has been edited by Mandorallen of Molynnr (edited May 18, 2001).]

[GB_Cobber]

Originally posted by Mandorallen of Molynnr:
Agreed, but I think that I'd take a slower MX, don't you need a lot of case cooling with that SDR? Anyways, I'm getting memsinks tomorrow, so I'll try them on my card over the weekend. Hopefully I'll break 200.

Owning a next generation card, even if it is slightly slower is nicer, you won't have as many issues and it should have better resale value (maybe?)

<edit> BTW I mean to say it a lot but very nice job on your SDR! It's definetly in a class of it's own. </edit>

I leave my case open till i get it sorted,but your dead right.
I could never run the 256 at high speeds with the original cooler.
It would roast.
And case temp could be an issiue.

------------------
"Clockit tillya Cookit"

Slot T Bird 700@750
MSI K7Pro(750 Irongate)Super Bypass enabled<(VIA KILLER )
300w power,320Mb PC133 CAS3
ASUS V6600 GeForce256 SDR SGRAM 120/166,top speed-166/217 v6.50 driver,NVMax2Beta.
WD ATA66 20Gb 7200,Creative Live v,LG CD-RW 2Mb,Cheap TV tuner,Win98 SE

5727 3D2k marks(default bench)800mhz http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752135

5603 3D2k marks(default bench)750mhz
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752293

4009 3D2k Marks(1024x768-32)750mhz
http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1752316

MDK2 Demo max 1024x768-16= 104 fps,32 bit = 76 fps,640x480-16 = 115 fps(cpu limit)800mhz

[Abit400]

Thanks guys.
I was pretty sure the MX was a better and faster chip, but I had heard from some other people that a GeForce256 can outperform an MX, but I they were wrong.
Thanks.

------------------
PIII667/133@667, Abit BE6, 128PC100@133, TNT1 16mb, IBM 14.4 7200 HD, Netgear FA310TX, 56k modem, Aureal Vortex2 SQ2500, Sony 2x4x24 burner and other USB stuff.
Check out this awesome website: Extreme-Genesis

[bigdog77s]

what's better... MX or GeForce with 32 DDR???

------------------
The best way to make the computer go faster is to drop it out a higher window

[seniorstooge]

GF256 DDR is faster than the MX.

A normal MX (i.e. 128-bit memory, 6ns) gives about the same performance as a GF256 SDR, but since the MX is still being developed some makers have put faster RAM in some of the MX cards, i.e. 5.5ns or 5ns RAM. These cards will of course be faster than the GF256 SDR which hasn't been upgraded (why upgrade an old GF256 design when GF2 is here).

Look at the Q3A 1024x768x32 HQMax roundup from April (has GF256 DDR, MX 128-bit SDR at 6ns, 5.5ns, 5ns and 4.5ns): http://www.digit-life.com/articles/d...deo-q3max.html

and the older one from March (has GF256 DDR, MX 128-bit SDR at 6ns, 5.5ns, and 5ns, plus GF256 128-bit SDR): http://www.digit-life.com/articles/d...deo-q3max.html

Combine the two roundups, from fastest to slowest:
GF256 DDR = 58 fps
MX 4.5ns = 51 fps
MX 5ns = 50 fps
MX 5.5ns = 46 fps
MX 6ns = 42 fps
GF256 SDR = 41 fps

Again, the GF256 SDR runs about the same as the original MX 6ns, and the fastest MX can't catch up with the GF256 DDR.


------------------
seniorstooge

• P!!! 700 FC
• CL AP GF256 DDR 32MB
  IBM SDD SE 7.04 (W4+FP15)
  NVIDIA 6.50 (W98SE)
• BX6r2(QR)
• 320MB

[This message has been edited by seniorstooge (edited May 20, 2001).]

[TeeTee]

Originally posted by Abit400:
Thanks guys.
I was pretty sure the MX was a better and faster chip, but I had heard from some other people that a GeForce256 can outperform an MX, but I they were wrong.
Thanks.

Sounds like you got your mind set on the MX, just make sure you get the SDR version... and stay away from Creative MX cards... I will suggets Leadtek through personal or friend's experience... also ASUS and 3d Prophet II MX are good choices too... If you get a choice, get twin output version. Mine has a TV out hooked up to a 29" screen.. its KICK *** for Games and DVDs. i play Games at 800x600x32xFSAA 2...also
G'Luck

-TT-

------------------
AMD Athlon TBird 750
ASUS A7V-BUSTED (on temp Replacement AOPEN AK33)
256MB PC-133 RAM
SEAGATE HDD 10GB UATA66
SEAGATE HDD 3GB ATA
LEADTEK GeForce 2 MX
Cretive DVD 6X
Creative DXR3 Card
Creative SB PCI 128 Sound
REALTEK 10/100 NIC
CONEXANT HCF 56K V.90 Modem
SONY Trinitron Multisync 17SF2