GeForce2 MX vs Radeon Xpress 1100
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Rage 8 (2002−2006) | Celsius (1999−2005) |
| GPU code name | RC410 | NV11 A2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 June 2006 (18 years ago) | 28 June 2000 (24 years ago) |
| Current price | no data | $76 |
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 6 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 2 MHz | 175 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 300 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 20 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 110 nm | 180 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 0.6 | 0.7 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon Xpress 1100 and GeForce2 MX compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | AGP 4x |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | shared Memory | SDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 32 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 166 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 2.656 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | No outputs | 1x VGA |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0 (9_0) | 7.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Radeon Xpress 1100 outperforms GeForce2 MX by 1600% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 June 2006 | 28 June 2000 |
| Chip lithography | 110 nm | 180 nm |
We couldn't decide between Radeon Xpress 1100 and GeForce2 MX. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon Xpress 1100 is a notebook card while GeForce2 MX is a desktop one.
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.
