Riva TNT2 vs GeForce4 MX 4000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce4 MX 4000 and Riva TNT2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1507 | 1519 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Celsius (1999−2005) | Fahrenheit (1998−2000) |
| GPU code name | NV18 A4 | NV5 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 December 2003 (21 year ago) | 12 October 1999 (25 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Core clock speed | 250 MHz | 125 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 29 million | 15 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 150 nm | 250 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 1.000 | 0.25 |
| ROPs | 2 | 2 |
| TMUs | 4 | 2 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | AGP 8x | AGP 4x |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR | SDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 128 MB | 16 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 166 MHz | 150 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 2.656 GB/s | 2.4 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x VGA | 1x VGA |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 8.0 | 6.0 |
| OpenGL | 1.3 | 1.2 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 December 2003 | 12 October 1999 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 128 MB | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 150 nm | 250 nm |
GeForce4 MX 4000 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce4 MX 4000 and Riva TNT2.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
