Voodoo3 3000 vs Geforce2 MX200 AGP

[winston9t4]

Hi,

I just picked up a Geforce2 MX200 AGP card relatively cheap. Should I replace my old Voodoo3 3000 AGP with it, or is the performance difference not very great? I will probably sell whichever one I don't keep. I am guessing I could get more for the GF2 since it is new.

I'm running a Celeron 566@850 with 384 MB of RAM.

Thanks for any advice!

Winston.

 

[sansoora]

Dear Winston

I now have a Geforce 2 Pro, however have had a Voodoo 2, 3 -2000 and 5500. I know that all the rave is about the Geforce cards, however I would carefully consider what your 2d/3d needs are. If you do most of your work on 2d, I have found that Voodoo cards really are better - they seem to give crisper image, and I have been through alot of cards. However, in 3d, the Geforce is going to be quicker in non glide games, but not by alot as it is the base Geforce card.

Eventhough I don't own a Voodoo card anymore, I hear alot of people saying that the cards are dead as there is no driver support. This is complete and utter rubbish, as you can still use the factory drivers for 95, 98, Me and 2000. Also, X3Dfx are publishing new drivers for XP, and I have heard there to be betas floating around out there.

Good Luck in your decision.

 

[Agamar]

My V3 3500TV was faster than the Gforce MX 200 in CounterStrike and I think Quake III.

 

[merlocka]

From Digit-life

October'2001 3Digest: Quake3 - standard settings, Athlon 1.4Ghz DDR, 1024x768

nVidia Geforce2 MX200 32MB 175/166 ... 38.4 / 67.3
3dfx Voodoo3 3000 166/166 ...................... na / 46.9

In 16bit color depth, the MX200 will be faster but the Voodoo3 16bit might look a little better due to the filtering 3dfx does.

In 32bit color depth, well, Voodoo3 can't do it.