whats better?? geforce 256 ddr of geforce 2 MX

[Mylle]

the mx is quite a bit cheaper on pricewatch??

you would think the gf 2 mx was faster

MYlle

 

[KarsinTheHutt]

Advantages of GeForce256 DDR:

Better framerates at high res due to higher bandwidth.

Advantages of GeForce2 MX:

Cheaper
Dual monitor support if you need it
Runs much cooler

I don't really think you can go wrong with either - It really depends on what you want your system to do for you.

 

[shiznut123]

The Geforce 256 DDR is the way to go in terms of overall speed.

 

[MulLa]

I second the 256DDR. My DDR scores better than my friend's MX in benchmarks under high resolution. Similar performance under low resolution.

 

[Rand]

The DDR GeForce is faster overall.

 

[akashra]

omg, some people.

additionally, the 2MX is an updated core with more features -
the CORE is faster and can process more than the DDR - the memory is not.

They will perform on par until you get to
a) applications with HEAVY memory use
b) High resolutions

IMO, go the MX - as I said, updated core, with support for more feautes - which you may find yourself wanting in the future, where the DDR does not support them.

 

[Imperium97]

I too would go with the MX. The original GF's were also power hungry and that caused some problems for some people. The extra features and newer core are quite nice IMO. If you want to squeeze a tiny bit more performance, you can try overclocking your memory. Going from 183 to 200 gave me about 4 extra fps. That's nothing I suppose but overclocking the memory was also nothing

 

[Tsaico]

If price is a big concern, I would third the MX, as many of them are sub 100 on price watch. And the performance loss is not that big of a difference.

 

[Nucleus111]

If you're into mucho gaming, the ddr. If just occasional gaming or don't care for the extra high resolutions at 32bit, the mx. The mx is also an updated core that will outperform a ddr in most windows applications, again depends what matters to you.

 

[Erasmus-X]

The GF2MX was designed to be a "budget" version of the higher end models (GTS/Pro/Ultra). I would stick with an MX solely based on the newer core, but it's not going to perform like an old GF DDR when it comes to high memory bandwidth, due to the watered-down features.

 

[Shudder]

What if you stick pretty much to 16 bit colour and "normal" resolutions like 800x600 or 1024x768?

Seems if I weren't planning on cranking it up too high resolution wise or didn't mind 16 bit, I'd take the MX over the gf1 simply because the newer technology, better core, cooler temps and less power requirements.

 

[Mixxen]

Check this thread...

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=27&threadid=366327

Since the DDR has higher bandwidth, then 1024x768x32 will be the sweet spot for the GF256 DDR. The MX will have a sweet spot at 800x600x32.

A higher clocked core does not improve performace as much as higher clocked memory. I bought the GF256 DDR cause it only cost a few bucks more and is playable at a higher resolution. Plus most GF256 DDR come with TV out.