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

Conclusion

The benchmarks revealed a surprising result. The GeForce2 MX400 with 64MB graphics memory is, with very few exceptions, always slower than the GeForce2 MX400 with 32MB graphics memory. As already mentioned, this is simply due to the fact that your memory is clocked 18MHz slower. Apparently, it can only benefit very rarely and in high resolutions from its plus in the size of the graphics memory. And even if it can benefit from this, it first has to catch up again due to the slow clock rate of the memory, in order to be able to then possibly overtake. In addition, the 64MB version is 20, - DM more expensive than the graphics card equipped with a little less but faster memory. So the decision shouldn't be difficult. The TV output works perfectly with the free TV tool. The good overclocking options, with which you can tease a few more frames per second out of the graphics card, are also positive.

In general, Inno3D should fine-tune the scope of delivery. Outdated driverson the CD and errors in the manual do not have to be. However, this does not change anything in terms of the performance of the graphics cards and that is ultimately what matters. Apart from these small weaknesses, the Inno3D Tornado GeForce2 MX400 with 32MB memory can definitely be recommended to every price-conscious buyer! However, we have to advise against the variant with 64MB memory due to the lower performance and the higher price. The graphics cards can currently only be purchased from PC-Sattler in Germany, further information is available on the Inno3D homepage!

Inno3D GeForce2 MX400
  • Good price/performance ratio
  • 3DMark 2000 Pro included in delivery
  • TV-Out including cable
  • Moderate manual
  • Outdated drivers

Was this article interesting, helpful or both? The editors are happy about any support from ComputerBase Pro and deactivated ad blockers. More about Ads on ComputerBase .

Comments