Should I Get A GF2 MX Or A Radeon 32?

[cybercham]

I know what you're saying! I just got the same card to replace my Fury and it's giving me double the performance (at least) that I had before. For $150 you can't beat it.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

snipe 505 look at my post all oem radeons are clock at 166/166ddr this only afects you choise if you are geting a 64mb wich is clocked at 183/183ddr retail

 

[cybercham]

Get the 32meg DDR retail if that's what you want it for. Go to the stores with the $50 rebate.

 

[rampage2001]

I am going to be against the grain and say MX all the way. Why? One reason, Nvidia has better driver support and if you don't have great drivers, you dont have a great card. The Radeon is a good performer especially when you compare the 32mb SDR vs. the MX. Also this is a personal feeling but I trust nvidia's chipsets a bit more than ATI's simply because they have been the leader and will continue to be, today a Radeon may look like a decent card but in times to come its like looking on past ATI chips and comparing them to TNT2Ultra which I'd much rather have in my system than some old ATI (boo) with poor drivers.
Yes I have a MX and it does have some problems with my socketA (kt133) athlon system, I've been running it at AGP2X to keep windows from having issues but it has not affected my framerates or windows performance. It might if it were a DDR chipset and I am going to look long and hard (in 3dfx/matrox's direction) the when I get a next gen video card for my 'puter.

I think you should take a look at a 32MB DDR GTS for $200.. $50 more is worth the ATI stomping performance that the GTS/Detonator3 combo offers.
You should consider this your guide (2) Bad drivers and no guaranteed upgrades (typical of ATI's previous driver releases).

 

[BFG10K]

I am leaning heavily toward the Radeon by my decision still isn't clear cut. It will be a difficult for me to even buy one where I live and nVidia have just released a new version of the detonator 2 drivers which have the performance of the detonator 3 drivers but without the stability problems.

What I really like is the reports that the Radeon delivers smooth and unfluctuatimg gameplay. I primarily play fps games and this would be a definite advantage for me.

rampage2001, I hear what you are saying but my favourite game is Quake 3 and I really want a board that will run it well. nVidia's boards suffer from that texture compression problem and I'm not really happy about this, especially since they seem to have no intention of fixing it.

Judging by the posts so far it looks like the Radeon is an excellent card for Quake 3. I have emailed some local computer shops for pricing and if I can get one it looks like I'll go with this board.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

ok I already said this and ill say it again the radeon ddr is beter than the mx and it wil be beter than the mx(alot beter because of the features) in the future(mostly the 3 texture unit and hyper z)

 

[rampage2001]

Hm. I think the $50 or so extra bucks to get the GTS ($200) over the MX ($97, not looking to bad compared to that radeon now ) or the DDR Radeon ($165) *crowd boos* would be the best choice. The GTS simply ownz for price/performance. Nvidia is the way to go if you want top notch support.. I think that TC problem will be fixed but I dont seem to have that problem with my MX. I'd just like to remind the radeonites that nvidia is the performance champ.

 

[glen]

As far as future use, didn't Carmack mention something about a feature in Doom 3 that currently was only supported by the GF?

 

[oldfart]

Well rampage, I guess that depends on what your definition of "performance" is. Unfortunately, most people (wrongly) define it as strictly a FPS benchmark. If that is all you care about, cool. Others care about overall performance. This includes 2D and 3D visual quality (a big one), game compatibility, stable drivers. The reviewers have us all too used to those FPS bar graphs. How many FPS you get in Q3 or 3DMark is only one of many performance considerations.

Glen, never buy a card for future games. Video cards are on a 6 month cycle. By the time Doom 3 is out, we will be looking at an entirely different set of cards.

 

[rampage2001]

You mean Nvidia is on a 6 month product cycle. With the GTS at $200 I am trying to sell my MX actually and get ahold of a GTS. I'd sell anyone mine for $60 if you pay shipping. 59fps in Q3A high quality 1024x768.. you wont find a ati that will do that at $60 even used. I run the card at 200core/180mem with a pci turbine fan next to it (the card has a decent sized heat sink on it) and its rock solid. People boost the reps of these traditionally non performance oriented companys and people fall for it for a while.. ati will be forgotten soon and nvidia will still be here running the show. Hopefully with 3dfx stepping back up to bat again with the rampage chip. If you like watching dvds on your computer instead of Q3A an ati is a great alternative..

 

[oldfart]

Another Nvidiot....whoopie:disgust:

 

[glen]

<< Glen, never buy a card for future games. Video cards are on a 6 month cycle. By the time Doom 3 is out, we will be looking at an entirely different set of cards. >>



I agree.
I buy a new card every 6 monthes.
Some others don't.
Someone mentioned the Radeon was more &quot;future&quot; proof, but, according to JC, the GF is more future proof.

 

[Weyoun]

What John Carmkac was talking about when he mentioned the current batch of cards was the register combiners on the GF range. These nifty little things let you play *loads* of tricks on the rendering of a 3d scene and are a very handy tool. What JC was reffering to specifically was the quality of one of the effects in the game looking better with register combiners. Although I would say the Radeon would run Doom 3 faster than a GF, what good will ~15FPS do over ~12FPS?

 

[glen]

Good point.
If I had not up graded by now, I would think about holding out for the NV20.
BTW, have any of you Radeon owners run the X-Isle demo from Nvidia yet? It is quite amazing, and I believe your card WILL support all the features. How does it look?

 

[Hawk]

Eh, I am encouraged by the high polygon demo Ace's had a few days ago, so hopefully the Radeon can last me a year or so. =)

 

[bozack]

I am also considering this purchase, spend more and get a radeon DDR or save a little and get a leadtek gf2 mx/ or a herc prophet 2 mx

right now I am leaning towards the radeon but also like the gf2 mx alot-any other opinions would be greatly appreciated thanks

 

[rickn]

The radeon has a more robust feature set, nvidia has the best driver updates. The MX is also crippled from the use of SDRAM, having half the memory bandwidth of the Radeon.

I got a 64mb Radeon VIVO from hawk, couldn't be happier. My previous card was Leadtek Geforce DDR, which was a great card, cept the 2d was unacceptable on a Trinitron

 

[cybercham]

Keep in mind that the MX only has 2 pixel rendering pipelines as opposed to the GTS's 4.

 

[bluemax]

Considering the price I paid... ~$99US for a Gladiac MX! WOW! So much video card for so little! I could spend $60 more for a Radeon DDR, but that money would be MUCH better spent on upgrading my Cel450A instead!

 

[bozack]

what about the DDR MX boards? possibly the one that creative will offer? I heard that they will also only run at half of the normal ddr or whatever but would that be a better option to the radeon? I want something that is good for both 2d and 3d but more geared towards gaming, and has excellent driver support(I hate bad drivers) I currently have a v3 2000 and that has just gotten old, 32 bit support would be nice, and in some ways is a necessity but if it costs an arm and a leg I can live without.

I am a fan of online games so whatever is best for q3a, UT and soldier of fortune is best for me, thanks

 

[TAsunder]

Um Rampage2001, I get at LEAST 59fps in Q3 with all stuff on high detail at 1024x768, according to cheesy benchmark tests. It is smoother in general than UT, which I get 60+ avg in. And I've got a mere Radeon 32ddr. I'm not willing to sell it for $60 though, I guess that's where the difference is. Sorry to burst your bubble. Also, the GTS (32 meg, not overclocked) does not own for price/performance beyond a doubt. There is at best a 25% improvement over a Radeon 32 meg ddr, and it costs more than 25% more. Logically speaking, it cannot be the Price/Performance leader.

Before trying out the Radeon with the BB rebate, I would have been skeptical. Now that I have one, I wouldn't trade it for the MX. People say the ATI drivers are unstable... well sort of. I can't always shutdown fully now, but all my games are less bug-ridden than when played by some of my friends with GTS cards. Half-Life works a lot better now too than it did with a v3 3k. These may not really be driver issues, but I don't think the drivers are really going to hurt many people here. Thanks to BenSkywalker, I now can run UT in 32 bit mode with S3TC on and it looks better than I could possibly imagine.. and it's 10-15fps faster than a v3 3k with all details set to medium or low in d3d or glide.

As a side note, everyone says they trust nVidia because they deliver a better product. True, they do now (to some degree) but I was one of those people who was fooled into getting a Riva 128, and boy did it suck. They are better because of innovation and delivering a better product now.. they have not always in the past. I wouldn't be quick to distrust ATI, though,... a large portion of servers run their 2d cards. If Dell trusts them with their enterprise servers, I think it's safe to say that they can at least do SOME things right.

 

[bozack]

Bluemax that is a good point since I also have a celeron 450A in my machine

somehow I always tend to forget other upgrades that also need to be done and only focus on the one, which in this case is the video card

My plan is to get a decent video card (either Geforce MX or radeon --I like the radeon though because of the memory and the fact that it has a fan )

and then to get just a pentium 3 600, since I don't feel I need anything faster than that and 600 p3 is all my mobo officially supports (bh6 version 1.01)

I am really considering either the radeon, the herc prophet mx, or the leadtek--

 

[cybercham]

Bozack,

We have the same system. I just got the 32 meg DDR Radeon for my c466 on a bh-6 rev. 1.01 and I'm thinking just about the same thing for my next processor. I think we could probably get away with putting a p3 700 on there though don't you think? I know the board only &quot;offically&quot; supports the 600 but I've seen lots of people saying it works fine.

I don't know what video card you have now but I can tell you that the Radeon will not disappoint. This card has given my old processor new life and I'm really not in a hurry to upgrade the CPU anyway because it plays smooth as it is.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

 

[bozack]

cyber-yeah we pretty much do have the same system, in fact my girlfriend (who I live with) has the same system as you, except hers is a bm6 with a 466.

Right now I have a voodoo 3 2000, which is getting pretty weak-especially for the games I like to play.

initially I was die hard set on the asus gf2 mx for the sole reason that it came with SOF retail (somehting that I have wanted a while)

But then I got to thinking that buying a card only for the software bundle is a waste, especially when it isn't that cheap.

Then I wanted the leadtek MX cause it was a little cheaper and I always wanted a video card with a fan.

After that is was a hercules prophet MX because it was available retail and it was supposedly good

and now it is a tie between the herculese prophet and the radeon 32mb ddr, or I might consider the creative ddr mx when it comes out, if I don't buy something before then.

I am just really indecisive, I like the sound of the radeon but at work we deal with alot of ati stuff and I know it is older but a rep tends to stick, whenever I think of gaming performance I think of nvidia or 3dfx, not ati.

oh well I will probabily have my mind made up by next week


ps. yeah I bet a p3 700 would work but I don't think I need that much, heck my 450 still allows me to kick some ace in q3a, 600 is enough for me least for a while, I just need better video

 

[bluemax]

Well, my reasoning for going with the MX was simply that I got it for $150 CDN with a box of Sony floppy disks. To get a 32MB DDR Radeon from the ForSale forum, would cost me $250 CDN. It was a very tough choice, but I know I need both video AND processor upgrade... by going with the cheaper MX (which was a much better choice than the Voodoo4 for the same price!) I can possibly afford to buy a new duron processor and mobo. Maybe.
I also like VIVO, and the Gladiac MX can use the ELSA VIVO module as soon as it's available! And that's far, far cheaper than getting a Radeon AIW or 64MB VIVO for $350 or $375 Canadian, respectively.
$150... I think I did good.