From tnt2 to geforce
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: From tnt2 to geforce

  1. #1

    From tnt2 to geforce

    Did anyone switch from a non-ultra tnt2 to a geforce? What was your improvement in fps? If it is a large increase, I'll get one. The highest q3a fps average I've gotten on a celeron 400@500, 128mb ram is 38.7.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Columbia Maryland U.S.A.
    Posts
    46
    69
    ~slicks

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    359
    In Q3A, 1024x768 16bit max everything I get 53-54 fps on my Celeron 400@500, 128MB with a Geforce sdr. I change to a ddr version today........

    Don't hesitate, GET ONE!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    545
    Hi!!

    I run the TNT2 Ultra CL with a Athlon 500@750. The fps is about the same as my other C300@495 with a CL Geforce Pro with 3.53 CL drivers when in lower resolutions like the 640x480x32bit.

    But if you are a hardcore gamer and plays at 1024x768x32bit, your should get one later not now as Geforce 2 is coming and Geforce now will drop at >$200.

    But if you cannot wait, get it now, DDR one.

    My Athlon setup is 35fps at 1024x768x32bit where my C300@495 setup is 60fps at 1024x768x32bit, dropping to 35fps at 1248x1024x32bit.

    Think about it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Posts
    182
    I upgraded from a Diamond TNT2 Ultra to a Geforce 256 DDR Annihilator Pro from Creative and it is at least twice as fast as my TNT2 ultra. The only hard benchmarks I did was on a 3D animation program so gaming results may be different. It is well worth the upgrade!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Norwich, UK
    Posts
    3,790
    ETSEAN

    The reason the Athlon gave you poorer preformance is to do with the later drivers setting the AGP to 1 X, ths was an across the board because so many of the Athlon mobos had stability problems. If you have a stable version there is a registry hack that resets it to 2x or higher.

    It's detailed in the:- http://go.to/geforcefaq

    BladeRunner

    [This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 02-12-2000).]

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    545
    Originally posted by BladeRunner:
    ETSEAN

    The reason the Athlon gave you poorer preformance is to do with the later drivers setting the AGP to 1 X, ths was an across the board because so many of the Athlon mobos had stability problems. If you have a stable version there is a registry hack that resets it to 2x or higher.

    It's detailed in the:- http://go.to/geforcefaq

    BladeRunner

    [This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 02-12-2000).]

    Thanks for your reminder.

    For the fact that TNT2 Ultra is the limiting factor now on a powerful CPU(if mine is one) that sees it cannot go higher than Geforce DDR do.

    The reason I recommends a Geforce DDR now is because CPU prices are high now(P3 only) and mobos are limited for Athlon. So if he wants something that will do good for him that increases FPS significantly, with his current system, Geforce DDR will change that.

    My C300@495 is doing better with a Geforce DDR than a TNT2 Ultra(both CL) significantly.

    At 10x7x32 bit, TNT2 Ultra can do only 34fps with high quality settings with all features on and only simple items off.

    Geforce DDR can do 60fps at the same resolution and settings.

    So now it is proven that a Geforce DDR is better significantly than TNT2 Ultra/non Ultra for his system.

    As for Athlon, I've just get a new 300watts PS and Geforce works with it. So I am going to benchmarks it against Celeron with Q3A and others.

    So DaMasta, what is your decision?
    Let me know.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Posts
    64
    I think your fps are pretty low. 60fps with DDR are pretty slow, mine is 58 with SDR. And, the second post is also about 58 fps but in 16bit, thats incredible low framerate, I think. Actualy, on my PIII 500MHz with 192MB RAM and Anihilator (SDR) is dooing the high quality over those damn good 58fps.
    At 1024x768x32 about 35. No, the 32bit is maximum at 1024x768 for SDR. But 16 bit at 1280x1024 are over 40fps and thats pretty great. With full details and sound, pretty decent framerates, so I wonder where you get yours lower ones, yeh, maybe because your machine is Celeron, but do you think the CPU will limit this so low (max 5 fps?)?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •