3.5ns equipped Geforce 2MX

[JayPatel]

Thats right......a MX

ripped from NvNews



<< Featuring Gainward's brand new high-performance/wide-bandwidth hardware design, specially developed to take utmost advantage of 32MB of 3.5ns SDRAM display memory, the Gainward GeForce2 MX TwinView VIVO &quot;Golden Sample&quot; is also potentially the highest performing GeForce2 MX graphics board ever built in mass production >>

 

[Rand]

I don't see where in that link it states 3.5ns memory?

 

[Rifter]

i saw it, on the MX twinview VIVO version.

 

[Wag]

Interesting to see how high it clocks. It's too bad that there are no full Geforce twinview boards or there would be no need for this.

I own their GoldenSample MX Twinview board with 5.5ns ram and I can't clock it over 195/195. Not worth the extra money I paid for it.

 

[Rand]

I'm thinking perhaps it's a typo and supposed to be 5.5ns

 

[BossDog]

I actually am thinking it isnt a typo. If you look at the other cards advertised on the page, there are other mxs with 4ns mem. 3.5 is wicked fast, and the mx desperately needs the bandwidth. However, putting 3.5ns ram with such a crippled core just seems wrong.

 

[BFG10K]

It's still largely a waste of time. SDR memory is too slow and it would have to be clocked damn high for it approach the bandwidth that DDR memory provides.

Don't get your hopes up.

 

[Mingon]

As sdr memory is more efficient than ddr shouldnt the sdr @285mhz/3.5ns be roughly equivalent to a geforce 1ddr ?

 

[ahfung]

It takes 300MHz (3.3ns) memory module to compete with GF1 DDR, which has plenty of room to overclock well over 333MHz with the standard 6ns DDR memory.

 

[Mingon]

I thought that DDR was about 85% efficient when compared to sdr, this would mean 333mhz is roughly equal to 285mhz sdr. Also this mx has a 200mhz core speed which could at a slight %increase

 

[ahfung]

I don't realize MX400 (64MB 166MHz DDR) would be slower than a generic MX (32MB 166MHz SDR), at least not in benchmarks conducted by Anand a few weeks ago.

 

[Mingon]

I have not seen these benches nor can I find them, all i have seen is the test using the creative labs geforcemx blaster which at an identical speed (333ddr&amp;64bit versus 166mhzsdr,128bit) was slower than a herc mx

 

[ahfung]

Creative MX DDR is clocked at 175/143, not quite as fast as SDR 175/166

Here is the MX-400 review

 

[Mingon]

Both mx cards tested are SDR, I know what speed the clab2mx was clocked at as I owned one but in the review (digit-life i think) they o/c the clab2 to mx speed and it was still slower iirc

 

[Mingon]

Add to that the fact that DDR isn't really twice as fast, since added latencies slow down the memory by about 10-20%, and you see the bargain starting to look less and less interesting.....

See told you

 

[Chusher3]

The Geforce2 MX 400 is an SDR card, also the Creative card is slower than SDR because it uses a 64bit DDR memory bus which is less efficient than the 128bit SDR memory bus of the other cards.

 

[Mingon]

The mx400 is sdr with 128bit or ddr with 64bit memory path, the point is that as ddr is less efficient it would need a higher memory clock on the ddr to equal sdr performance

 

[ahfung]

oops, it's SDR my bad

Any benchmark compares SDR and DDR MX?

 

[Mingon]

have a look at the link, although the clab is slower clocked even o/c it is slower performing

 

[ahfung]

Mingon, thanks for the link, but it didn't show any MX DDR@166 benchmarks. It only compared DDR@143 vs SDR@166.

 

[Mingon]

Their is a review floating around somewhere on another site, cant find the link will post if I find

 

[Jethro Bodine]

&quot;As sdr memory is more efficient than ddr shouldnt the sdr @285mhz/3.5ns be roughly equivalent to a geforce 1ddr ? &quot;

Wowee! A new card that's as fast as a 1.5year old, $100 card! This is truly a golden age we live in, wondrous times indeed....

 

[Mingon]

Found the link T-break but it seems to be deadat the moment, you could try e-mailing them and getting it sent to you?

 

[MikroMak]

I've got a clabs gf2mx and it comes default clocked at 175/286 (64bitDDR). It comes with absolutley no cooling. With a cheapie heatsink, a 486 fan, and some radioshack paste I got mine up to 220/360 which maxes out the nvidia sliders. It ran stable for 3 hours in Deus Ex and I was running 2x2 AntiAliasing. All this is under win2k and I'm asssuming the lockup came from the overclocking. It seems perfectly stable after I clocked it back down to 220/333. If anyone cares to know I can pull the board out tell you the memory speeds. just reply if you wanna know.