The GeForce2 MX performs just as like we expected at 640x480 - matching the rest of the GeForce line in 16-bit color, and matching the GeForce SDR in 32-bit where memory bandwidth starts to become an issue. Notice the T&L enabled cards (the GeForce line and the Savage 2000 based Viper II), take the top 5 spots in this benchmark.
The standings remain the same at 800x600, but the various models in the GeForce line begin to differentiate themselves a bit more. Once again, we see the GeForce 2 MX come out slightly ahead of the GeForce SDR, but fall significantly behind when 32-bit color is enabled. The Voodoo 5, with its raw power, is able to sneak in and grab the 5th place spot from the Viper II. If we look at 32-bit performance, we actually see that the Voodoo 5 comes in 3rd, followed by the Viper II and then the GeForce 2 MX.
The Voodoo 5 keeps moving up as we bump the resolution to 1024x768 and is now slightly ahead of the GeForce DDR in 32-bit color mode. For the GeForce 2 MX, the constraints of the 166 MHz SDR memory bus are increasingly apparent as the resolution increases. Thanks to the increased core clock and reconfigured texture pipelines, it is still able to beat the GeForce SDR by a significant margin in both 16-bit and 32-bit modes.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
3 Comments
View All Comments
Dr AB - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link
So 20 years laters I can say it is analogous to MAX-Q cards that we see today? Seems same logic behind it.Dr AB - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link
*laterOtritus - Friday, October 2, 2020 - link
The logic behind MAX-Q is severely reduce clock speeds and voltage to reduce power consumption. This is analogous to entry-level gpus such as tu117 in the gtx 1650. Cut down the hardware to reduce cost and power consumption, and have slightly lower clocks to hit tdp targets.