CPU
GPU
GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Popular choices:
GeForce4 Ti 4800
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is positioned at rank 750 and the GeForce4 Ti 4800 is on rank 384, so the GeForce4 Ti 4800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Performance Per Dollar GeForce4 Ti 4800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2010). 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 GeForce4 Ti 4800 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce4 Ti 4800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 50% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce2 MX/MX 400.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-50%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+50%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| 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 $40 for the GeForce4 Ti 4800, it costs 63% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 77.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+77.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce2 MX/MX 400 and GeForce4 Ti 4800
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.
GeForce4 Ti 4800
The GeForce4 Ti 4800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 26 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6 points. Launch price was $499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 scores 4 versus the GeForce4 Ti 4800's 6 — the GeForce4 Ti 4800 leads by 50%. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is built on Turing while the GeForce4 Ti 4800 uses Fermi, both on 12 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 480 (GeForce4 Ti 4800). Raw compute: 3.226 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 1.345 TFLOPS (GeForce4 Ti 4800).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4 | 6+50% |
| Architecture | Turing | Fermi |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+87% | 480 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.226 TFLOPS+140% | 1.345 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 48+50% |
| TMUs | 64+7% | 60 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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/MX 400) vs 8.1 (GeForce4 Ti 4800). OpenGL: 1.2 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 7.0 | 8.1+16% |
| OpenGL | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs No (GeForce4 Ti 4800). Decoder: MPEG-2 Decoder vs No.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | MPEG-2 Decoder | No |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 draws 25W versus the GeForce4 Ti 4800's 250W — a 163.6% difference. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 350W (GeForce4 Ti 4800). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 55°C vs 65°C.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-90% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 216mm |
| Height | 100mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 55°C-15% | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce4 Ti 4800 launched at $399 and now averages $40. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 costs 62.5% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.3 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 0.1 (GeForce4 Ti 4800) — the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 offers 200% better value. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | GeForce4 Ti 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-68% | $399 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-63% | $40 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.3+200% | 0.1 |
| Codename | N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1 | GF100 |
| Release | August 1 2020 | March 26 2010 |
| Ranking | #523 | #488 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce2 MX/MX 400 and GeForce4 Ti 4800
