A brief description of two cards

More similarities... and a (big) difference

The drivers

The tests (1)

The tests (2): overclocking

The tests (3): PCs slightly ancient


Released page

Juan Herrerías Rey

Articles about the Videocard

What is... the videocard?

principal page
what is...
to update
Contact Us
forum and chat



The distribution of the present pages is prohibited without the express assent of the authors.

All the marks are registered by his respective owners.

For more legal details, pulsate in the following icon


Cards GeForce2 MX: Creative 3D Blaster against Hercules 3D Prophet II MX


The drivers

Or "controlers software of device"; anyway, the programs that allow to make use of the yield of these powerful cards. The Creative includes the NVIDIA controlers, with multiple characteristics, but quite personalized (and of appearance somewhat wooden bowl, in my opinion), that also are much updated. We even have an option to facilitate the overclocking, "Tweak". Pantallazo of the drivers Detonator 3 of NVIDIA

On the other hand, Hercules uses the controlers of NVIDIA translated into Spanish and little more (Hercules's logotype, more than anything). Eye, this does not make them less powerful, not much less: some time ago that the NVIDIA drivers satisfy entirely the needs of the most demanding or curious users. Nevertheless, they were not so modern, but as they are updated periodically it is very probable that cards sell already with drivers more recent.

In any case, in addition to proving the included ones, we decide to install the last available version of the Detonator 3, the generic drivers of NVIDIA. These drivers are much optimized for the whole family of cards GeForce; NVIDIA makes sure that they offer up to 50 more % of yield... and it can be, we obtained up to 32 more % of yield that with drivers ancient, and they were the most rapid (very little more than the originals of the Creative), therefore we use them in all the tests.

He knows already: if it has any GeForce, it is worth passing for the NVIDIA page and unloading these drivers. And the fact is that to support the updated drivers of the videocard has always been and it will be important... for not speaking about the DirectX of the company of Bill Gates.


The tests (1)

The team that we use was the following one:

  • Microprocessor: Pentium III 733.
  • Motherboard: ABIT SE6 (chipset Intel 815E).
  • Memory: 128 MB PC133, CAS3 to 133 MHz.
  • Hard disk: Seagate ATA/66 of 8 GB.

As "graphic card of control", we select one that was to the height: neither more nor less than a TNT2 Ultra to 175/183 MHz (speeds of chip / memory). And we do not try at least of 1024x768 píxels, because this would be a game even for the normal TNT2, let's not say for this GeForce2 MX.

Comparative of the yield in Quake 3 Sand to 1024x768 píxels

Comparative of the yield in Quake 3 Sand to 1280x1024 píxels

Well, these two graphs prove impactantes: truth? Yes, it is absolutely true: we repeat the tests more than twenty times in the different days, try with ALL the drivers that we had to hand... and the case is that in Quake 3 the Creative 3D Blaster GeForce2 MX is more than 24 % slower than Hercules 3D Prophet II MX. Without possible discussion, and a Creative fan says it.

But good, just in case we feel almost forced to do some test more, skylight:

Comparative of the yield in 3DMark2000 to 1024x768 and 32 bits

In a completely different test, almost the same result: 20 % worse the Creative with memory DDR of 64 bits. And it be fixed that we say "with memory DDR of 64 bits", because the graphic chip is IDENTICAL and the rest of the team also. It seems that it is better to have 128 rails in the highway, although the car is a "slow" SDRAM...


To return

Pulsate in the picture desplegable or in "Following"

Following - Sitemap - Contact us Best website of 2009 & 2010 voted by us are:
, , , , , ,,