or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Nvidia GForce2 MX and Geforce 3?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nvidia GForce2 MX and Geforce 3?

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
I only og the Geforce 2MX with my 867 - has anyone got the Geforce 3 and can y9ou compare it to the 2 ?? is it worth the extra bucks ?

Also I still only have the 128 ragepro on my Dual 500, - the new Pc ATI 8500 is AGP2/4 usable (unlike the Geforce 3 which is only AGP4). Does anyone know if ATI have something like it for MAC coming.... the All inwonder model especially would be great for AV stuff.

Anyone ?
Cheers
adam
post #2 of 19
The Radeon 8500 is coming to the Mac but the best you could hope for in your AGP 2x system is the current Radeon. Anything more and your system becomes a bottleneck for the card.
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
post #3 of 19
The GeForce 3, while already discontinued on the PC side, is an amazing card. On low resolutions, like 640 x 480, you will only notice a slight increase in framerates, but once you pump up the resolutions, the GF3 keeps the framerates steady and does not taper off in performance as fast as the GF2 thanks to (I believe) very good memory bandwidth.
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #4 of 19
Is there any timeline when the radeon 8500 will come? I want to get a lower radeon and am waiting for the prices to plummet.
post #5 of 19
Does anyone know what the best graphics card that my AGP G4 400 can take? I have a Rage 128 Pro in there now. I have a ton of memory and it runs ok, but I'd like to get a higher framerate.

Thanks
Therefore, we request that you cease and desist from displaying your signature on all web sites and servers under the moderators' control, including AppeInsider.
Reply
Therefore, we request that you cease and desist from displaying your signature on all web sites and servers under the moderators' control, including AppeInsider.
Reply
post #6 of 19
A Radeon 32MB DDR AGP or if you're the dangerous type, a Voodoo 5 5500.

[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: MacAddict ]</p>
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #7 of 19
[quote]Originally posted by MacAddict:
<strong>A Radeon 32MB DDR AGP or if you're the dangerous type, a Voodoo 5 5500.

[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: MacAddict ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Just to let you know, DONT get a voodoo 5500, I have one, OK its PCI in a g4 400, (do they do AGP?) and its crap even in OS9 with the right drivers. In OSX its even worse, it will run, but there are no drivers for it, so it runs very slowly. I don't know about dangerous, maybe stoopid!
post #8 of 19
I upgraded my Dual 500 MHz G4 (AGP 2x) from the Apple OEM Rage Pro to the OEM Radeon 32 MB DDR and it made a world of difference in OS X, but seemed to make less difference in OS 9. I suspect that this is due to the apparently negligible support for the Rage Pro in OS X that some people have stated. I don't know, I haven't seen the precise issues they claim. My ATi Rage Pro PCI runs my 2nd monitor with ease and has not had any problems thus far.

The other reason I would venture to guess is that OS 9 rarely took advantage of my 2nd processor, so perhaps the CPU was the bottleneck, not the graphics card. In OS X, most everything uses the 2nd CPU, so now the card is the bottleneck, not the CPU.

All I know is that in Giants (OS X 10.1.1, of course) my Radeon gets me 15-25 fps at 1280 x 1024 and my Rage Pro gets me 2-5 fps at 800 x 600. Both of these are the AGP cards (I never tested my PCI Rage Pro, just the AGP one), and except for the resolution, all settings were the same.

In the Return to Castle Wolfenstein test (both the 1st and the 2nd), I get from 40 to 80 fps at 1280 x 1024 with mostly maxed settings on the Radeon. Keep in mind that the tests do not support multiple processors, I have to manually turn it off. I expect this game to absolutely cruise when it hits the shelves.

All in all, I'm very happy with the Radeon. It also beats out the GF2 in most tasks. Check <a href="http://www.innermac.com" target="_blank">http://www.innermac.com</a> for a very thorough review of the two cards. Don't believe that crap at CNET either... their review of the two cards was mostly bull.

Sidenote: I sure wish innermac (intentionally spelled all lower-case) would update their site with new content. They really do a good job on the stuff that they have done so far. Very objective and quantitative analysis of the subject matter.

-Ender
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
post #9 of 19
Thread Starter 
Hey Ender, thanks for the read out. It is rare to get a clear perspective on cards from anyone. I bet you hose the Formics (buggers). If you see my original post I was wondering if ATI have something like their 8500 coming for the MAC. Im with you - the dual 500 under OS X should be able to handle it. (and unlike the geforce 3 the PC version of the 8500 can take agp2 or 4x.

any clues ?

Cheers
post #10 of 19
I have a G4 733 quicksilver with a geforce 3. I must say I'm impressed. In OS X when I play Elite Force I get around 70-100fps. That's at 1024-768 with 32bit and everything on. I can have alot of action going on and still get a solid 60fps. I love this card and I would definately recomend it to anyone who has a computer that can use it.

Strider
G4 733 Quicksilver
512MBof RAM
40gb HD
64MB Geforce 3
CD-RW/DVD drive
Reply
G4 733 Quicksilver
512MBof RAM
40gb HD
64MB Geforce 3
CD-RW/DVD drive
Reply
post #11 of 19
GeForce 3 as a standard part on all new PowerMacs would be sweet.

GeForce 2mx would become standard on the iMacs.

We'll finally have gaming Macs at 'reasonable' prices.
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
post #12 of 19
Although you won't hear it from Apple, the GeForce 3 DOES work in AGP 2x systems like the DP 500. I don't know how much performance is gained over the Radeon though, because I do not know much about the bandwith limitations of the AGP 2x buses.

A recent article at <a href="http://www.macgamer.com" target="_blank">http://www.macgamer.com</a> is an interview with an ATi representative (I forgot who...). They state in the article that the 8500 will come to Mac, they just aren't sure when. Typical, I suppose, but it's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

NeoMac: I agree that GF3s on PowerMacs would rule, however I'd rather see the Radeon 32 MB DDR in the iMacs. If you read the review I posted, I think you will agree. TwinView (monitor spanning) would be quite nice too... but I doubt that Steve will allow it in the iXxx series for quite some time.

Oh, and I kind of feel sorry for the buggers... No race deserves that kind of treatment, human or otherwise. [Sorry to all of you who have no clue what I'm talking about.]
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
post #13 of 19
Thread Starter 
your sentiment would make you an admirable speaker for the dead.

Thanks for the link - I think i just might wait and see what ATI comes up with for the 8500...... nd for once wouldnt it be nice if Mac could get the All-in-wonder version too !1

Cheers
adam
post #14 of 19
[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>GeForce 3 as a standard part on all new PowerMacs would be sweet.

GeForce 2mx would become standard on the iMacs.

We'll finally have gaming Macs at 'reasonable' prices.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Geforce 3 are too expansive to become standart in the powermac line, they still be an option. Most photoshop user's have nothing to do better with a geforce 3 unstead a geforce 2 mx.
post #15 of 19
I still don't understand people's obsession with the GeForce 2 MX. The Radeon, with it's higher speed memory and 6 texture units rather than 4, beats the GF2 on nearly all counts. The only thing that I haven't seen on a mac edition Radeon is TwinView, and that is only on the top end GF2s (that cost more). Performance-wise, the Radeon is the card to go for if you cannot afford a GF3.

Especially important to have the Radeon rather than the GF2 for 2D tasks like Photoshop and scrolling through large documents.

Of course, the GF3 really kicks everything else's ass at the moment, even 2D. As tested by the wonderful folks at innermac, using the Porformance 3 as a baseline of 100%, the GF2 scored a 183%, the Radeon a 299%, and the GF3 a 365%.

Hrm... seems that Photoshop users DO have a reason to own a GF3. But definitely NOT a GF2. As for cost, I picked up an OEM Radeon 32 MB DDR from MacMall or MacConnection or somewhere like that for $170. This is the one with ADC. Pretty cheap.

-Ender
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
post #16 of 19
Pretty cheap? WHAT?!? $170 will get you a GeForce 3 Ti 200 on the PC side!

AHHH!
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #17 of 19
The GF3 Ti 200 is a reduced speed GF3. Even the GF2 beats it in some tasks. And considering that they don't even make one for the Mac, it's really a non-issue. I suppose you could get one and flash it, but that's unreliable at best, and you'd be better off going with a supported Radeon.

Even on the PC side, I wouldn't go with a GF3 Ti 200.

-Ender
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
If you find yourself sided with the majority, it is time to change your thinking.

-Mark Twain
Reply
post #18 of 19
[quote]Originally posted by Strider:
<strong>I have a G4 733 quicksilver with a geforce 3. I must say I'm impressed. In OS X when I play Elite Force I get around 70-100fps. That's at 1024-768 with 32bit and everything on. I can have alot of action going on and still get a solid 60fps. I love this card and I would definately recomend it to anyone who has a computer that can use it.

Strider</strong><hr></blockquote>

I have the same setup, except I started with the stock Geforce2MX and just upgraded to the Geforce3. Unfortunately, in RtCW I am NOT seeing any difference what-so-ever!!! Did your system come with the 2MX and you upgraded so that you had something to compare your numbers to? Or did you BTO yours, and hence, have no comparison base?
post #19 of 19
[quote]The GF3 Ti 200 is a reduced speed GF3. Even the GF2 beats it in some tasks. And considering that they don't even make one for the Mac, it's really a non-issue. I suppose you could get one and flash it, but that's unreliable at best, and you'd be better off going with a supported Radeon.
Even on the PC side, I wouldn't go with a GF3 Ti 200.
<hr></blockquote>

I know this is old, but I have to completely disagree with you here. The GF2 is a completely different card, it CANNOT beat the GeForce 3 except MAYBE the GF2 Ultra at lower resolutions.

<a href="http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q4/011218/geforce-ti-23.html" target="_blank">Link</a>
<a href="http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm" target="_blank">Link</a>

The GeForce 2 does not support DirectX 8 functions like Vertex Shaders etc, and almost all GeForce 3 Ti 200s can be overclocked not only to GeForce 3 speeds, but Ti 500 speeds and beyond. The GF3 Ti 200 is one of the best value DirectX 8 cards considering it is amazing cheap and a great overclocker (go Gainward for Ti 500 speeds).
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Nvidia GForce2 MX and Geforce 3?