GeForce 2 MMX vs. GeForce (one) Ultra

[tvpincdoc]

I have a question about older (read "less expensive") video cards. Would a GeForce Ultra with 32 MB of DDR-RAM (like a Creative Annihilator Pro) compare with a GeForce 2 MMX 400 with 64 MB of SD-RAM (say the ASUS V7100),

I haven't seen any reviews comparing the two (most compare GeForce 2's or The GeForce 2 with the GeForce 3) with the older first gen. I have seen the two on several web sites, and the prices are about the same. I'm doing a build for a family member who isn't too heavily into graphics. I would just like to know which has the best output.

The specs don't help much. The GeForce 2 has 23 million triangles per second, but the bandwidth is only 2.9gb/sec, while the ultra has a peak fill rate of 15 million triangles per second, but a memory bandwidth of 4.8gb/sec.

[fred]

Hi tvpincdoc,
Difficult question! It requires me to remember those comparisons! Yes, the 2 is faster, but the difference depends on the resolution and color depth you play at. The higher the resolution and colour depth, the smaller the difference, this is because bandwidth is a critical factor at higher settings.
I would actually go for more memory rather than faster memory for another reason too. Problem is that if you run out of memory in a game, it can cause some severe glitches in the play. Better to have the gameplay smooth!

[tvpincdoc]

That was the way I was leaning. Thanks.

As for myself, I go for both. That's why I bought the GeForce 3 with 64 megs of DDR. Bandwidth and GPU speed.

[fred]

Me too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[freptide]

I bought the Geforce 3 Ti200. These cards are worth every penny. Yhe 2 uses 60% of the cpu and the 3 uses about 10 %. It takes the heat off of your cpu!

[fred]

Hi freptide,
With me it was more that I just bought whatever was good at the time. When the GeForce II came out, I bought one of those. When the III came out, I bought one of those. But mine is not a Ti, its the III-DDR, so I am a little behind the times!