• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

upgrade path from GeForce 2 MX

M

MrHappyMonkey

Diamond Member
I am considering dumping my GeForce2 MX and replace it with either a GF2 GTS/Pro or a GF3. Will the increase in performance/quality justify the cost? My rig definatly won't be a bottleneck. I am running Win XP Pro. I am on a budget, so that should defiantly be a factor.
 
With cost a factor, i don't think an upgrade would justify the cost. IMHO, i'd say you'd have to jump to at least the GF3 Ti 200 to notice a difference (and i doubt it would be a HUGE difference) , and that's at least $179
 
I own a Geforce3 Ti 200. I think its worth it. Your geforce2 mx is alot slower then the
geforce 3 ti 200 and the plus side is its cheap and you can overclock that sucker like i have mine.
 


<< I am considering dumping my GeForce2 MX and replace it with either a GF2 GTS/Pro or a GF3. Will the increase in performance/quality justify the cost? My rig definatly won't be a bottleneck. I am running Win XP Pro. I am on a budget, so that should defiantly be a factor. >>



You say your on a budget, how much of a budget <$100?

I've also owned a Geforce2 MX and I upgraded to a Kyro2, I found that with my MX when I ran games at 1024x768x32bit the game turned into a slideshow, I hate using 16bit which I must admit gave a performance increase but it justs looks bad compared to 32bit. With my Kyro2 I can now run games in 32bit without worrying about slowdown. If you have a fast cpu ie >1ghz and want to play games at more than 640x480 then a Kyro2 is a great budget buy! 🙂

Nemesis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top