TNT2 16MB vs. Geforce2 MX200 32MB

[Clocker]

Hey guys-
How much do you think my soon to be brother-in-law will notice the difference in RtCW or Max Payne with subject upgrade? Think it will be huge?

The new card is an Abit Siluro T200 with 32MB SDR onboard. I haven't seen much in the way of reviews for the MX200 so I'm not sure if it is a worthwhile upgrade. THe card only cost me $10 shipped so I figured I'd jump on it....

Thanks for any opinions....

C

 

[Groltz]

With the games you mentioned, C, i don't think there'll be much difference. Either of those cards will limit resolution, not permit AA or AF (without even worse performance), etc.

Unless your brother likes 5 FPS slideshows, that is.

 

[Clocker]

Well, he'll be stuck at around 800x600 resolution. Maybe 1024/768 MAX on his 17" screen. THe games should get higher frame rates with the newer card, right? They are currently a little herky jerky with the TNT2 16MB. Deer Hunter 4 just totally is slow for some reason....maybe just a crappy game.

If you had to rate the the GF2MX200 vs the TNT2 with the TNT2 getting a score of 50%, what would you give it?

Thanks,
C

 

[Clocker]

I guess the real question I need answered is.....

Is the GF2 MX200 a lot crappier than just a standard GF2 MX?

I think a standard GF2 MX would be a nice upgrade based on the reviews I've read but I don't know if the MX200 is really castrated or what....

C

 

[CougTek]

..but I don't know if the MX200 is really castrated or what....

Yes, it is. half the memory bus bandwidth and only SDRAM IIRC. Slower RAM too. Castrated really fits here. I've always seen it as a 2D only card, and blury 2D to top it. Not a GeFarce 2 MX200 fan here.

 

[Clocker]

But it should be a nice step-up form the 16MB TNT2, right?

C

 

[time]

Depends how fast the TNT2 is and how poor the MX200 implementation is.

If the TNT2 is a Pro or Ultra version, then it will probably out-perform the MX200 in 32-bit color. The latter is really only suitable for 16-bit.

If the TNT2 is only an M64/Vanta, you'll get better results with the MX200.

In any case, that's a seriously sucky card, as Coug says. It would be difficult for it to achieve even half the performance of an MX400 in many situations.

Just dug up this comparitive review that I remembered from a couple of years ago:

http://www.digit-life.com/articles/gf2leadtekmx200/

 

[Clocker]

The card it might be replacing is a Viper V770 TNT2 (non-vanta) 16MB AGP with SDR. It seems that the Siluro T200 might be an upgrade that isn't worth the time. MAybe I'll just keep it as a spare and let them stick with the TNT2....