The MX's design essentially gives it half the theoretical power of the GeForce2 GTS. Assuming equal clock speeds, this would essentially place the GeForce2 MX at a distinct disadvantage against the GeForce2 GTS and Ultra boards, but how would it stack up against the rest of the NVIDIA lineup?

Since the GeForce2 GTS core is capable of quad-pipeline processing (dual-pipeline for the MX) and has the capability for dual-textures per pipeline, per clock, this puts a slightly different spin on it. The original GeForce 256 chip also supported a quad-pipeline, but could only handle one texture per pipeline, per clock.

The standard GeForce2 MX is clocked at 175MHz, while the default speed of the GeForce 256 is only 120MHz. Taking these core speeds into account and using their theoretical specifications, the GeForce2 MX will perform slightly faster in multi-texture games than the GeForce 256 (700 vs. 480 megapixels/sec.), while the GeForce 256's quad-pipelines will push it ahead (480 vs. 350 megatexels/sec.) in single-texture games. If these numbers seem a bit confusing, simply multiply the clock rate by the number of pipelines for megapixels/sec, then take that number and multiply it by the number of textures per pipeline for megatexels/sec.

When compared to the 200MHz GeForce2 GTS or 250MHz GeForce2 Ultra, which both support quad-pipeline and dual-texture options, GeForce2 MX performance lags behind. These two chips are designed to be the performance leaders of the NVIDIA fold and it shows in the specs. The GeForce2 GTS pumps out 800 megapixels/sec. and 1600 megatexels/sec., while the GeForce2 Ultra ups the ante a bit with a 1000 megapixels/sec. and 2000 megatexels/sec. fillrate. As such, don't expect the GeForce2 MX to compete with the big boys in terms of overall 3D performance, but as an inexpensive option with more than enough power to match, and possibly surpass, the original GeForce 256 SDR.

All of this performance is packed into a very compact chip that uses approximately 4W of power. This is a radical shift for NVIDIA and their previous power hungry products such as the GeForce 256 and GeForce2 GTS. Also, since the 3D Prophet II MX does not sport an on-board cooling fan, this lowers the potential power draw even further. It is doubtful that GeForce2 MX boards will have any of the problems the GeForce256 or GeForce2 GTS did with AGP power requirements that caused issues with certain motherboards.