Menu
Inno3D Tornado GeForce2 MX400 in the test: 32 and 64 MB VRAM in comparison

Inno3D Tornado GeForce2 MX400 in the test: 32 and 64 MB VRAM in comparison

3DMark 2001

The latest addition to MadOnion's 3D benchmark series is 3DMark 2001, which also uses DirectX 8 functions. Therefore, the graphics cards cannot run some tests at all. This benchmark is an indication of the performance of the graphics cards in future games.

3DMark 2001 16Bit
Unit: points
  • 640x480:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      3.612
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      3,605
    • GeForce2 MX
      3,514
  • 800x600:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      3.364
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      3.334
    • GeForce2 MX
      3.226
  • 1024x768:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      2.944
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      2.924
    • GeForce2MX
      2.792
  • 1280x1024:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      2.271
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      2.209
    • GeForce2 MX
      2.090
  • 1600x1200:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      1.732
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      1,678
    • GeForce2 MX
      1,546

The two graphics cards from Inno3D are on the same side, the classic GeForce2 MX has to admit defeat here . Obviously, the larger memory of the 64MB variant and the fast memory of the 32MB variant balance each other out, so the results are almost the same. In resolutions from 1280x1024, however, the 32MB variant is again just ahead.

3DMark 2001 Game 3 16Bit
Unit: points
  • 640x480:
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      74.1
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      74.0
    • GeForce2 MX
      73,5
  • 800x600:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      69,6
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      68.8
    • GeForce2 MX
      67.0
  • 1024x768:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      58,1
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      57.6
    • GeForce2 MX
      54.8
  • 1280x1024:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      39.7
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      38,4
    • GeForce2 MX
      35,8
  • 1600x1200:
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      28.6
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      27,8
    • GeForce2 MX
      24, 5

The two GeForce2 MX400 graphics cards book almost the same number of images per second. The GeForce2 MX, however, is quite behind in last place. In 640x480, the frame rate is obviously limited by the remaining system components.

3DMark 2001 32Bit
Unit: points
  • 640x480:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      3.340
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      3,302
    • GeForce2 MX
      3.244
  • 800x600:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      2,950
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      2.895
    • GeForce2 MX
      2,853
  • 1024x768:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      2.320
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      2.317
    • GeForce2 MX
      2.249
  • 1280x1024:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      1.564
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      1.548
    • GeForce2MX
      1.410
  • 1600x1200:
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      1,075
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      1.013
    • GeForce2 MX
      1.007

Almost the same picture results in 32Bit color depth. However, with the difference that in higher resolutions, the 64MB variant takes the lead for the first time, as it can make real use of its large graphics memory. In 1600x1200, the two graphics cards with 32MB of memory are on par, which suggests that the size of the graphics memory is the limiting factor here.

3DMark 2001 Game 3 32Bit
  • 640x480:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      70,6
    • GeForce2 MX
      69,3
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      68,3
  • 800x600:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      60.9
    • GeForce2 MX
      59.1
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      58.2
  • 1024x768:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      44,6
    • GeForce2 MX
      43,2
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      42,9
  • 1280x1024:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      27.0
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      25.3
    • GeForce2MX
      23,9
  • 1600x1200:
    • GeForce2 MX400 32MB
      18.4
    • GeForce2 MX
      17,6
    • GeForce2 MX400 64MB
      17,4

This diagram offers a relatively balanced picture. All graphics cards offer almost identical performance, the 32MB version of the GeForce2 MX400 can only slightly set itself apart from the rest of the field.

On the next page: Aquamark

Comments