MX DDR vs 256 DDR

[Guest]

Ive seen comparisons between SDR MX's all over the place, but not much on the DDR. Im trying to decide between the ASUS 6800 which is a 256 DDR card and the ASUS 7100 pure which is an MX DDR card (http://www.asus.com.tw/products/addon/vga/agpv7100/spec.html).
Would the MX DDR card be a lot better in this instance or would the 256 DDR have some sort of advantage.

Thanks for any info guys.

 

[Bubba]

Here is the rankings as per www.madonion.com
However, it may be a little outdated because I believe that the GeForce 2 Ultra should be at the top, but here it isn't even listed.

1. NVIDIA GeForce2 GTS/Pro
2. NVIDIA GeForce DDR
3. ATI RADEON DDR
4. NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
5. NVIDIA GeForce SDR
6. 3dfx Voodoo5 5500
7. ATI RAGE FURY MAXX
8. NVIDIA RIVA TNT2 Ultra

 

[Guest]

Cool, thanks for that, would u know anywhere that addresses DDR MX though, since thats still comparing the SDR MX.

 

[Bubba]

Try this:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1370&p=1
It has some info on page 7 about MX cards with DDR ram. It seems that they are not any faster and in some cases slower. It has to do with the limited data pathway on the MX cards not the ram.
Overall, based on all the reviews I have seen, the Prophet MX card should be the fastest.
My friend has one and it works great.
Hope this helps.

 

[Guest]

Thanks for that, it helped a lot, actually differed to some things that Tom said in his comparison of the Geforce chipsets.

 

[Take_Out]

Simply put, the GeForce 256 DDR is faster because it has more memory bandwidth than the GeForce 2 MX. In order for the company to market the MX, and not compete with the GeForce2 DDR, it throttled the memory thru-put to about half of the bigger brother. This is less thru-put than the GeForce 256 DDR has by approx 1/2. This only matters at the higher resolutions and frame rates. If you like or need the bells and whistles of the MX, go ahead, if you want pure raw processing power at high resolutions for gaming on a big screen monitor, then get the GeForce 256 DDR or better. Good Luck, Take-Out.

 

[Guest]

I do agree with Bubba's opinion about DDR MX cards. They use DDR memory with a 64 bit wide bus, opposed to that, SDRAM MX cards use SDRAM with a 128 bit wide bus. So I am going to give you an example. If we suppose the memory in the SDRAM card runs at 183 Mhz , it "carries" 128 bits in 5.5 nanoseconds = 23.27 bits per nanosecond, and the memory in the DDRAM card runs at 333 Mhz, it "carries" 64 bits in 3 nanoseconds = 21.33 bits per nanosecond, then which one is faster? And the SDRAM card is easier to overclock. Then your doubt should be buying a SDRAM GeForce 2 MX or a DDR Geforce, the Geforce will give you more FPS out of the box, but you can use it as a room heater, you won't be able to overclock it at all, on the other side a Geforce two comes out of the box without a fan, if you like spending your time in overclocking, you will be able to overclock the hell out of it. I don't think you should care about the details, GeForce 2 may have TwinView, or Vibrant (or whatever) color control, it's just another name for gamma and contrast, and you may not be using them at all. So the question is: which one is cheaper? And even though you all love nVidia, what about a 32 MB RAdeon DDR?

 

[rcf84]

WHAT JUANMI SAID WELL THE 32MB RADEON WOULD BE GOOD FOR YOU. IF YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE GET A RADEON OR GEFORCE DDR (NOT MX)

FAST 16BIT - GO FOR GEFORCE DDR
FAST 32BIT - GO FOR RADEON
FILL RATE - GOR FOR GEFORCE DDR
MORE POLYGONS - GO FOR RADEON
FSAA - GO FOR RADEON
DVD DECODING - GO FOR RADEON

ONE OTHER THING

INTEL SYSTEM - GEFORCE DDR
AMD SYSTEM - RADEON

SOMETHING ELSE IS WEIRD WHY IS THE RADEON 7012 DRIVERS MADE BY MICROSOFT?

 

[Guest]

Try turning your capslock off, mate