[maximage]

I have a dual 800 with the standard GeForce2 TwinView and have the opportunity to get a cheap "Apple" ATI Radeon (ie, ADC version for my Cinema Display). Question is, is it better than the card Ive got? I had a PCI Radeon in my previous G3 B&W and was fairly happy with it, but how does it fare on the AGP version?

[Leonis]

Keep in mind that once you get the Radeon you will lose the dual monitor capability that's provided by the GeForece 2 Twinview.

[kbbaucom]

It looks like the Radeon and GeForce2 MX are about the same in 3D. You can see a comparison here. I think they are about the same in 2D also, but I don't have any tests showing it. It's hard to benchmark 2D stuff accurately.

[ 12-15-2001: Message edited by: kbbaucom ]

[roders]

I've used both these cards in my G4 Cube and if you had an older G4 with 2X AGP slot I would have no hessitation in telling you to go for the Radeon, unfortunately there is a little confusion as to the AGP speed rating of these cards, the nvidia is deffinetly a 4X card (and works @ 2X speed to) this should in "theory" give it a speed advantage over the Radeon which is deffinetly at least 2X AGP (I think it might be 4X AGP compatible, but most people disagree).
The Radeon has more advanced hadware, faster Ram, better DVD playback, better 2D, and much better RAVE performance (for games like Dues Ex UT etc) Open GL IS slightly faster with the Radeon (especially @ high screen resoloutions which your Dual 800 will be able to handle, and it looks SO much better), and at a guess I would say it "FEELS" %5-10 faster/smoother than the Geforce 2MX (which is still an okay card).
If I was you I would buy the Radeon, and try both, then sell the one you decide not to keep on eBay, you'll probabbly make a profit on the card (I sold my radeon for well over $300 dollars, lots of people want Radeons/Geforce2's for there towers & Cubes).
P.S I'm looking @ your query from a gamers perspective with this post
Good luck!

[ 12-16-2001: Message edited by: roders ]

[joe]

Here's an exhaustive side by side comparison of the GF2MX and Radeon for Mac that covers everything from 2D to 3D to DVD: http://www.innermac.com/features/g2mx-radeon/

One nice feature of this article is that it covers MANY 3D Mac games, not only Quake3 (my fav). Overall, the GF2MX is faster at low resolutions in Q3 while the Radeon is faster at high resolutions in Q3 and just about any other 3D game in general (low or high res). Personally, between these 2 cards I'd also recommend the Radeon. It works great in my Cube .........joe

[kbbaucom]

Originally posted by joe:
<STRONG>Here's an exhaustive side by side comparison of the GF2MX and Radeon for Mac that covers everything from 2D to 3D to DVD: http://www.innermac.com/features/g2mx-radeon/

One nice feature of this article is that it covers MANY 3D Mac games, not only Quake3 (my fav). Overall, the GF2MX is faster at low resolutions in Q3 while the Radeon is faster at high resolutions in Q3 and just about any other 3D game in general (low or high res). Personally, between these 2 cards I'd also recommend the Radeon. It works great in my Cube .........joe</STRONG>

I read that review, and I think either their card was bad, or they were using an alpha version of the drivers. In their "driver stability" section, they show all kinds of problems that I cannot reproduce, and have never seen on mine. I've never had any dropped frames on DVDs, and have never seen any of the rendering errors they saw (and I have the same DVDs to test). Also, my RAVE games, like Unreal, and UT don't look dark and dull. They are just as bright as my Voodoo 3 was, and brighter than my Rage 128 Pro (I know it's not a Radeon. I don't have one). The snow looks fine in UT on my GeForce2 MX400, where they show that it was streaky. I also have no problem with 4x4 Evolution. I will download the Warbirds demo after I finish this post. The only game I do have any problems with is Diablo II. That's more of a Blizzard problem than nVidia though, I think.