What's the difference between a TNT2 and a TNT2 Ultra?
Hi, I've been thinking about getting a TNT2 card but I noticed that there are at least 3 different kinds; TNT2 16mb, TNT2 32mb, and TNT2 Ultra (32mb?). Can anyone clarify what the difference is between the three? And which one should I get.
Hi,
I've been thinking about getting a TNT2 card but I noticed that there are at least 3 different kinds; TNT2 16mb, TNT2 32mb, and TNT2 Ultra (32mb?). Can anyone clarify what the difference is between the three? And which one should I get. I currently have a TNT (V550) and a Celeron 450. Would the more expensive Ultra be worth it in my case?
Do I need 32mb for anything else expect really high resolutions? I mean I usually use 800*600 or 1024*768 anyway.
Another thing; How good a job does Powerstrip do in Win2K? I'm curious because in win98 I used TNTOverclock and it used to increase my Quake3 framerate by 10fps. Now, when I use(d) Powerstrip in Win2K the increase was only about 2-4 fps! Maybe it's just the NVidia drivers.
Thanks!
I've been thinking about getting a TNT2 card but I noticed that there are at least 3 different kinds; TNT2 16mb, TNT2 32mb, and TNT2 Ultra (32mb?). Can anyone clarify what the difference is between the three? And which one should I get. I currently have a TNT (V550) and a Celeron 450. Would the more expensive Ultra be worth it in my case?
Do I need 32mb for anything else expect really high resolutions? I mean I usually use 800*600 or 1024*768 anyway.
Another thing; How good a job does Powerstrip do in Win2K? I'm curious because in win98 I used TNTOverclock and it used to increase my Quake3 framerate by 10fps. Now, when I use(d) Powerstrip in Win2K the increase was only about 2-4 fps! Maybe it's just the NVidia drivers.
Thanks!
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
the ultra is tweaked to run overclocked on its internal clock speed is much faster then
the non ultra's
thats all i know
dont touch the diamond there support sucks still no driver not event betas.
i traded my 770 ultra in for a ati rage fury
it works perfect in win2k fullscreen games and all
Wallaby
p.s. dont take my word for it uses your own mind look at there website and search this site for diamond or 770.
the non ultra's
thats all i know
dont touch the diamond there support sucks still no driver not event betas.
i traded my 770 ultra in for a ati rage fury
it works perfect in win2k fullscreen games and all
Wallaby
p.s. dont take my word for it uses your own mind look at there website and search this site for diamond or 770.
Wallaby, I don't know what you're smokin', but i have a diamond v770 ultra and it works just fine. Sure diamond has poor driver support for it, but who cares? Just use the nvidia reference drivers and you're golden. I haven't had a problem with any of my games in win2k "full screen and all".
I did a search of the forum like you suggested, and I haven't seen any 770 problems since the 3.78 drivers came out. Trust me Andy, it is a good card to get.
I did a search of the forum like you suggested, and I haven't seen any 770 problems since the 3.78 drivers came out. Trust me Andy, it is a good card to get.
There is a big chance that the Diamond drivers are based on the nvidia drivers anyways...nobody cares to develop their own.
TNT speeds (cl/mem) range from 125/140 to 153/180 (ultra)...you can fiddle yourself with these settings, an few MHz here and there will be safe without need for extra cooling...You might want to try an Elsa Erazor III Pro, they're good quality, but if you want performance, go for the ErazorX2 DDR
...it'll make u drool
TNT speeds (cl/mem) range from 125/140 to 153/180 (ultra)...you can fiddle yourself with these settings, an few MHz here and there will be safe without need for extra cooling...You might want to try an Elsa Erazor III Pro, they're good quality, but if you want performance, go for the ErazorX2 DDR
...it'll make u drool
Hi,
Thanks for the info.
Is it so that all the TNT2s and all the TNT2 Ultra etc. all have the same general NVidia chips (which means it really doesnt matter which brand I get if I use the reference drivers)? So the difference is only in the core and mem clockspeeds. But then can I not overclock a regular TNT2 to the same values as the TNT2 Ultra?
I guess the 16mb cards are not worth gettin, even if I only use the lower resolutions? In any case I'll probably get a bigger monitor one day, and then I'll want to run games in higher resolution.
Andy
Thanks for the info.
Is it so that all the TNT2s and all the TNT2 Ultra etc. all have the same general NVidia chips (which means it really doesnt matter which brand I get if I use the reference drivers)? So the difference is only in the core and mem clockspeeds. But then can I not overclock a regular TNT2 to the same values as the TNT2 Ultra?
I guess the 16mb cards are not worth gettin, even if I only use the lower resolutions? In any case I'll probably get a bigger monitor one day, and then I'll want to run games in higher resolution.
Andy
I have both TNT2 and TNT2 Ultra boards (Guillemot) in different machines. I have tested them quite a lot so I have an idea of what they are worth.
The difference is that they select the best chips to sell them as "Ultra". Memory chips are also faster on Ultra boards. That means you will not overclock an TNT2 to Ultra speed (unless you are very lucky).
Again, if you are lucky, you will be able to overclock an Ultra board quite a bit.
So my recommendation would be to go with an Ultra with 32 Mb memory (forget crappy 16 Mb)from any manufacturer.
If you can afford the extra bucks, you better go with a GEForce, of course preferably a DDR one. There is really a difference if you want to play 1024x768 and above in 32 bit color
The difference is that they select the best chips to sell them as "Ultra". Memory chips are also faster on Ultra boards. That means you will not overclock an TNT2 to Ultra speed (unless you are very lucky).
Again, if you are lucky, you will be able to overclock an Ultra board quite a bit.
So my recommendation would be to go with an Ultra with 32 Mb memory (forget crappy 16 Mb)from any manufacturer.
If you can afford the extra bucks, you better go with a GEForce, of course preferably a DDR one. There is really a difference if you want to play 1024x768 and above in 32 bit color
Ok I got it now. Thanks.
By the way, do you know what the selection of "better" chips is like? Is it like the way Intel's "choosing" of better Celerons for example? Which means that there isnt really a big difference in the chip speeds; some are just labeled ultra and others arent (according to demand for example)? Just curious. The manufacturers will of course claim that there is a big difference.
Andy
By the way, do you know what the selection of "better" chips is like? Is it like the way Intel's "choosing" of better Celerons for example? Which means that there isnt really a big difference in the chip speeds; some are just labeled ultra and others arent (according to demand for example)? Just curious. The manufacturers will of course claim that there is a big difference.
Andy
