GeForce2 MX 100/200 vs GeForce2 MX/MX 400

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce2 MX/MX 400

#740

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

361900%

#742

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

328067%

#743

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

327200%

#747

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

297533%

#748

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

295500%

#750

GeForce2 MX/MX 400

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

100%

#751

GeForce4 MX 440

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

100%

#752

RADEON 7200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

100%

#753

GeForce 256

MSRP: $199|Avg: $20

100%

#754

GeForce2 MX

MSRP: $129|Avg: $49

67%

#755

GeForce4 440

MSRP: $469|Avg: $49

33%

#756

GeForce3

MSRP: $499|Avg: $49

33%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce2 MX 100/200.

Insight	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $49 for the GeForce2 MX 100/200, it costs 69% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 335.6% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+335.6%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49)	✅More affordable ($15)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce2 MX 100/200 Benchmark Check

GeForce2 MX/MX 400 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce2 MX 100/200 and GeForce2 MX/MX 400

GeForce2 MX 100/200

The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.

GeForce2 MX/MX 400

The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 1 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1575 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX 100/200 scores 3 versus the GeForce2 MX/MX 400's 4 — the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 leads by 33.3%. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is built on Pascal while the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 uses Turing, both on 14 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs 896 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX/MX 400). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 1575 MHz.

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
G3D Mark Score	3	4+33%
Architecture	Pascal	Turing
Process Node	14 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	384	896+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7972 TFLOPS	3.226 TFLOPS+305%
Boost Clock	1038 MHz	1575 MHz+52%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	24	64+167%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 7.0 (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs 7.0 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400). OpenGL: 1.2 vs 1.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
DirectX	7.0	7.0
OpenGL	1.2	1.2
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs None (GeForce2 MX/MX 400). Decoder: None vs MPEG-2 Decoder. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400).

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Encoder	None	None
Decoder	None	MPEG-2 Decoder
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce2 MX 100/200 draws 10W versus the GeForce2 MX/MX 400's 25W — a 85.7% difference. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs 350W (GeForce2 MX/MX 400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 55 vs 55°C.

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
TDP	10W-60%	25W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	165mm	—
Height	64mm	100mm
Slots	1	1
Temp (Load)	55	55°C
Perf/Watt	0.3+50%	0.2

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce2 MX 100/200 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 launched at $129 and now averages $15. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 costs 69.4% less ($34 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.1 (GeForce2 MX 100/200) vs 0.3 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) — the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 offers 200% better value. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2017).

Feature	GeForce2 MX 100/200	GeForce2 MX/MX 400
MSRP	$0-100%	$129
Avg Price (30d)	$49	$15-69%
Performance per Dollar	0.1	0.3+200%
Codename	GP108	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Release	May 17 2017	August 1 2020
Ranking	#657	#523