Upgrade V3 3k to GeForce2 MX in Duron 900mhz?

RobsTV

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2000
2,520
0
0
After upgrading from a K6-III 448 to a Duron at 896mhz, it seems as though it may be time to upgrade video cards. Plus I have had enough of 3dfx flacky drivers, and crappy tech support. Once they aquired STB, they "Sh*t The Bed". Money is the big stopper though.

Will I notice much of a gain switching from V3 3000 AGP to GeForce2 MX, used primarily at 1024x768? Half-Life, UT, AOE, racing and sports simms (Madden, Links LS etc), are what I do most. Never play Quake3.

Any suggestions as to which GeForce2 MX card?
TV out is a mandatory for gaming, and dual head would be nice.
Price point MUST be under $135.
Any opinion's on these cards or any others?
PowerGENE CMX2S w/TV.
Leadtek w/dual head.
INNO 3D GeForce2 32 MB mx AGP DUAL HEAD w/TV.

Thanks,
rob
 

Goi

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
6,763
6
91
Half Life will probably improve, but Half Life was never a very video intensive game, so you probably won't notice the difference unless you run it at very high resolutions. UT is still 3dfx's playground, so you probably won't see much improvement there over your V3, except at higher resolutions. You will see some improvement, but whether it justifies the upgrade, you decide.

AOE isn't 3D, and the 2D of both cards are comparable, so no difference there. I'm not sure what API Madden, Links LS etc use, but if its D3D or OpenGL, you will see a difference. If there are GLide options for those games, then no, probably not much difference.

Of course, you also gain a lot of features, which are tangible benifits, features such as 32bit color rendering, 32bit Z-buffer, large texture support, bump mapping, a TnL unit, FSAA, etc.
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,956
126
With a such a powerful CPU you should seriously consider a GF2/GF2 Ultra. The MX is a nice little board but it will be limited very quickly at high resolutions with such a powerful CPU driving it.

Sure you may see no difference at 800 x 600 or less, but with such a good CPU you could easily be playing at 1280 x 1200 with a GF2 and at 1600 x 1200 with a GF2 Ultra. If you are buying such a good CPU you may as well pay a bit extra and get a decent card to go with it.

So get one of the MX's bigger brothers and watch your gaming take off. :)
 

Techwhore

Golden Member
Aug 2, 2000
1,248
0
0
Actually, what BFG10K said isn't really all that true... the current batch of new video cards are "self" limiting by their memory bandwidth, it has nothing to do with the cpu.. infact if you read the anandtech articles on any of the recent cards you can see the geforce 2 GTS performs the same at high resolutions on a 500 mhz system as to a 1000 mhz system. With that being said, i'll give you some real world stats:

athlon classic 550
voodoo 3 2000 @ 166
UT @ 1280x1024 i get 40 fps, slightly less in a large board or crowded server, 1024x768 i get 50+ fps

my friends machine:
celeron 300a @ 450
Geforce 256 DDR
He can get at least 40 fps in Q3 and UT at any resolution... i think it may dip down below in Q3 at 1600x1280x32 but i can't remember.

The point of that is to show you that no matter what card you buy, MX or 2 GTS or Ultra, you're gonna play smoothly at any resolution and color depth. That being said i'd go for the MX, it's bang for the buck and faster than the Geforce 256 DDR, i don't know if tha's saying much for today's market though.
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,956
126
the current batch of new video cards are "self" limiting by their memory bandwidth, it has nothing to do with the cpu..

The CPU just as important in 3D games as the video card is.

infact if you read the anandtech articles on any of the recent cards you can see the geforce 2 GTS performs the same at high resolutions on a 500 mhz system as to a 1000 mhz system.

Well yes, but we are comparing how the MX performs to other video cards, and the MX is definitely more bandwidth limited than any of its bigger brothers. With such a fast CPU the MX will quickly become the system bottleneck. In other words he may as well be running a 500 MHz system.

You are not understanding the what the issue is. The issue is whether he will see a difference between an MX and one of its bigger brothers, not what speed CPU he needs to saturate a given video card.

Take a look at these benchmarks. The MX is already holding back a 1 GHz CPU at 1024 x 768 and will likely hold such a fast system back at 800 x 600 as well.

Then take a look at how well the MX's bigger brothers are doing. They are doing much better at high resolutions. As I said before, the MX will just be a bottleneck to his system.

UT @ 1280x1024 i get 40 fps,

UT is almost entirely dependent on the CPU and does not scale well with faster video cards.

The point of that is to show you that no matter what card you buy, MX or 2 GTS or Ultra, you're gonna play smoothly at any resolution and color depth.

That is just plain false. If you don't believe me go back and re-check the link I gave you. You are slightly confused about the issue at hand and about how 3D benchmarking works.
 

blammo22

Member
Aug 6, 2000
82
0
0
I have the Leadtek in my system now; works great so far. About the same speed as a GeForce DDR, and it also has a fan/heatsink on the chip (unlike most GF2MX cards). Only thing is that the TV out is S-Video only (no composite output), and my TV and VCR have no S-Video outputs...argh! Either spend $40 on a converter, or pickup a new VCR, or just not use it. :-(

If you go for a GF2MX, I suggest running the latest NVIDIA leaked drivers (6.26 or later) since the seem to have some fixes for KT133 boards...
 

RobsTV

Platinum Member
Feb 11, 2000
2,520
0
0
Thanks for the input.
BFG10K, you must have missed most of my post's meaning.

TV Out is mandatory.
Primary use is at 1024x768.
Dual Head would be nice.
Priced less than $135.

Upon further review, $150 delivered works.
Seems like a Dual Head Retail GeForce2 MX will give me more
usefullness for $150, than an OEM GeForce2 GTS at $175, or
a basic Radeon at $150 after rebate. If the GeForce GTS
dropped to around $150, then it may be worth it, as a TV out
convertor could always be added.

EDIT:
Done deal. Got a new VisionTek GeForce2 GTS 32MB DDR from
one of the "you bid" Auction sites that auctions retail, for $159.
Also have coming an INNO 3D GeForce2 32 MB mx AGP DUAL HEAD w/TV
output full retail +COOLING, for $140. Probably will end up selling
the GF2 GTS.

DOUBLE EDIT:
GF2 GTS price was too good to pass up.
Went back 4 hours later and got another card.
This time $144 + $7.99 shipping.
Why pay more..........?