What's faster GForce2-MX or G400-Max

alewisa · Mar 3, 2003, 03:56 PM

Here's a question for the panel, whats the "faster" video card?

A G-Force2 MX or a Matrox G400-MAX, under Win2K?

The later has far better visual quality, but which is faster for games? Excluding OpenGL, cos matrox has never been good at that.

Not fussed about driver revision, but if anyone has any ideas or comparisons/benchmarks or links therefto, I'd appreciate.

I have both cards, am retiring a PIII-650 to a friend. I just dont have the time to install, test, and remove two cards and associated drivers.

They will want it for office work (leaning towards the G400) but will want to play some games (is the MX a better choice here?). I have no probs with a G400 gaming, but hey, I'm me. I'm just not sure if I want to give away the faster card!

Brgds
Alan

Madgoat1979 · Mar 3, 2003, 04:46 PM

Well the Geforce is For sure faster....

BUT!

The g400 holds some nice features... Dual head, Bump mapping 360 RAMDAC.... well... I PERSONALY think that the G400 is better... BUT ... for gaming... I think the Geforce would Show a LOT more.

the g400 was in compititionwith the TNT2 in its Day.... So the geforce 2 is going to be a bit more advanced I'd say.

Gaming= Geforce

Office (two monitors) = G400

there ya go....

Peace,
MG

dipstick · Mar 3, 2003, 04:59 PM

If you're into gaming, stick with the GF2 and OC it.

***craig5320*** · Mar 3, 2003, 05:09 PM

Moved, it'll get a better response in the tech forum

~~Sourcer_2002~~ · Mar 3, 2003, 06:05 PM

Im currently running a GrForce2 MX400 on a AMD 1700+ server that also doubles a gameing rig for when i host LANs and a friend needs to use a comp. Has played any game ive tryed on high. And runs the Doom 3 alpha flawless.

Matth · Mar 3, 2003, 06:28 PM

I had a quick review hunt, and found the G400 trading punches with the TNT2 (high clocked version).

Sounds like any Geforce 2MX, other than perhaps the memory bandwith crippled MX200, should blow it away.

Also considerable praise, though, for the Matrox "TurboGL" driver - an OpenGL ICD aimed at game performance
http://www.active-hardware.com/engli...deo/g400-2.htm
TurboGL is applied automatically where appropriate.

This was the 5.30 driver, presumably continued into the current driver spread....

http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...atest/home.cfm
Latest Win2K drivers, 5.88.061 - dated *** 28 feb 03 ***

http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...ified/home.cfm
Certified driver - 5.86.03s

http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...s/ftp_util.cfm
Utilities section - includes an overclocking utility (not usable with CERTIFIED driver), and a replacement ICD

Note the unusual results for a limited degree of overclocking in the last section of
http://www.active-hardware.com/engli...deo/g400-4.htm
- obviously some limiting factor is being released?

JavaFox · Mar 3, 2003, 07:55 PM

This is no contest. The GF2MX is th faster card by far. Now, the G400 has incredible image quality, DualHead support, and was the first card to support EMBM (GF2MXs don't), but the GeForce is faster.

alewisa · Mar 4, 2003, 04:29 PM

Thanks guys

Time at home is limted now I seem to be living full time with my partner (100 miles from home... npower must be wondering what happened to the electrickery consumption!), so this weekend is going to be a straight diver de-install, card swap, and driver install.

EBM looked great in the demo, only ever saw one game support it (that I knew of), and didn't play that game anyway.... but superb image quality. And it was good enough for Unreal Tournament, so that was all I cared about.

Thanks all

Mar 3, 2003, 03:56 PM	#1
alewisa DriverHeaven Addict Join Date: May 2002 Location: Kendal, UK Posts: 260 Rep Power: 0	What's faster GForce2-MX or G400-Max Here's a question for the panel, whats the "faster" video card? A G-Force2 MX or a Matrox G400-MAX, under Win2K? The later has far better visual quality, but which is faster for games? Excluding OpenGL, cos matrox has never been good at that. Not fussed about driver revision, but if anyone has any ideas or comparisons/benchmarks or links therefto, I'd appreciate. I have both cards, am retiring a PIII-650 to a friend. I just dont have the time to install, test, and remove two cards and associated drivers. They will want it for office work (leaning towards the G400) but will want to play some games (is the MX a better choice here?). I have no probs with a G400 gaming, but hey, I'm me. I'm just not sure if I want to give away the faster card! Brgds Alan __________________ TRS-80, dual 5.25", 32K C-64 o/c to 2Mhz, 1541 with PhantomDOS Amiga 4000/040@66Mhz, C64-3D, 64mb, 4.3gb SCSI Netware 4.11 And too many damn PC's to care!

Mar 3, 2003, 04:46 PM	#2
Madgoat1979 VTX NuTz!!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: AZ Posts: 763 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	FASTER? Well the Geforce is For sure faster.... BUT! The g400 holds some nice features... Dual head, Bump mapping 360 RAMDAC.... well... I PERSONALY think that the G400 is better... BUT ... for gaming... I think the Geforce would Show a LOT more. the g400 was in compititionwith the TNT2 in its Day.... So the geforce 2 is going to be a bit more advanced I'd say. Gaming= Geforce Office (two monitors) = G400 there ya go.... Peace, MG __________________

Mar 3, 2003, 05:09 PM	#4
*craig5320* HH Administrator Join Date: May 2002 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 8,568 Rep Power: 445 System Specs	Moved, it'll get a better response in the tech forum __________________ HardwareHeaven on Facebook

Mar 4, 2003, 04:29 PM	Thread Starter #8
alewisa DriverHeaven Addict Join Date: May 2002 Location: Kendal, UK Posts: 260 Rep Power: 0	Thanks guys Time at home is limted now I seem to be living full time with my partner (100 miles from home... npower must be wondering what happened to the electrickery consumption!), so this weekend is going to be a straight diver de-install, card swap, and driver install. EBM looked great in the demo, only ever saw one game support it (that I knew of), and didn't play that game anyway.... but superb image quality. And it was good enough for Unreal Tournament, so that was all I cared about. Thanks all __________________ TRS-80, dual 5.25", 32K C-64 o/c to 2Mhz, 1541 with PhantomDOS Amiga 4000/040@66Mhz, C64-3D, 64mb, 4.3gb SCSI Netware 4.11 And too many damn PC's to care!

Mar 3, 2003, 04:59 PM	#3
dipstick HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 3,609 Rep Power: 71 System Specs	If you're into gaming, stick with the GF2 and OC it.

Mar 3, 2003, 06:05 PM	#5
~~Sourcer_2002~~ BANNED Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Indiana , USA Posts: 2,677 Rep Power: 0	Im currently running a GrForce2 MX400 on a AMD 1700+ server that also doubles a gameing rig for when i host LANs and a friend needs to use a comp. Has played any game ive tryed on high. And runs the Doom 3 alpha flawless.

Mar 3, 2003, 06:28 PM	#6
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	I had a quick review hunt, and found the G400 trading punches with the TNT2 (high clocked version). Sounds like any Geforce 2MX, other than perhaps the memory bandwith crippled MX200, should blow it away. Also considerable praise, though, for the Matrox "TurboGL" driver - an OpenGL ICD aimed at game performance http://www.active-hardware.com/engli...deo/g400-2.htm TurboGL is applied automatically where appropriate. This was the 5.30 driver, presumably continued into the current driver spread.... http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...atest/home.cfm Latest Win2K drivers, 5.88.061 - dated * 28 feb 03 * http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...ified/home.cfm Certified driver - 5.86.03s http://www.matrox.com/mga/support/dr...s/ftp_util.cfm Utilities section - includes an overclocking utility (not usable with CERTIFIED driver), and a replacement ICD Note the unusual results for a limited degree of overclocking in the last section of http://www.active-hardware.com/engli...deo/g400-4.htm - obviously some limiting factor is being released?

Mar 3, 2003, 07:55 PM	#7
JavaFox E Pluribus Unum Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,203 Rep Power: 0	This is no contest. The GF2MX is th faster card by far. Now, the G400 has incredible image quality, DualHead support, and was the first card to support EMBM (GF2MXs don't), but the GeForce is faster.