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.

GeForce2 MX vs GeForce3 Ti 200 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce2 MX vs GeForce3 Ti 200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce2 MX

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅GeForce3 Ti 200 is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce2 MX is the less risky modern option long term.
✅Draws 25W instead of 215W, a 190W reduction.
✅Measures 160mm instead of 183mm, a 23mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (3 vs 4).
❌Less VRAM, with 65 MB vs 512 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Fewer Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation (64 vs 368), which can reduce FPS gains in supported games.
❌Older hardware, 65 MB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce3 Ti 200

2018

Why buy it

✅+33.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 15.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $129 MSRP).
✅475% more Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation, which can increase overall FPS in supported games (368 vs 64).
✅693.7% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (512 MB vs 65 MB).

Trade-offs

❌2018 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌760% higher power demand at 215W vs 25W.
❌14.4% longer card at 183mm vs 160mm.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce3 Ti 200 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 33.3% in PassMark G3D (4 vs 3), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce2 MX is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 8nm process instead of 12nm and a newer 2022 generation instead of 2018. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce3 Ti 200 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $20 more expensive on MSRP at $149 vs $129, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 15.4% (0.0 vs 0.0), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GeForce3 Ti 200 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce2 MX has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce2 MX vs GeForce3 Ti 200 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce2 MX

The GeForce2 MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in Maio 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 832 MHz to 1155 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.

GeForce3 Ti 200

The GeForce3 Ti 200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points. Launch price was $699.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX scores 3 versus the GeForce3 Ti 200's 4 — the GeForce3 Ti 200 leads by 33.3%. The GeForce2 MX is built on Ampere while the GeForce3 Ti 200 uses Turing, both on 8 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GeForce2 MX) vs 2,944 (GeForce3 Ti 200). Raw compute: 4.731 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX) vs 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce3 Ti 200). Boost clocks: 1155 MHz vs 1710 MHz. Ray tracing: 16 RT cores (GeForce2 MX) vs 46 (GeForce3 Ti 200) with 64 Tensor cores vs 368.

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
G3D Mark Score	3	4+33%
Architecture	Ampere	Turing
Process Node	8 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2048	2944+44%
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.731 TFLOPS	10.07 TFLOPS+113%
Boost Clock	1155 MHz	1710 MHz+48%
ROPs	40	64+60%
TMUs	64	184+188%
L1 Cache	2 MB	2.9 MB+45%
L2 Cache	2 MB	4 MB+100%
Ray Tracing Cores	16	46+188%
Tensor Cores	64	368+475%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce2 MX has 65 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce3 Ti 200 carries 512 MB. GeForce3 Ti 200 gives you 693.7% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GeForce2 MX and 64-bit on the GeForce3 Ti 200. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce2 MX) vs 4 MB (GeForce3 Ti 200) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
VRAM Capacity	0.063 GB	0.5 GB+694%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB	4 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 7.0 (GeForce2 MX) vs 8.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200). OpenGL: 1.2 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
DirectX	7.0	8.1+16%
OpenGL	1.2	1.3+8%
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce2 MX) vs None (GeForce3 Ti 200). Decoder: MPEG-2 Decoder vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce3 Ti 200).

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
Encoder	None	None
Decoder	MPEG-2 Decoder	None
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce2 MX draws 25W versus the GeForce3 Ti 200's 215W — a 158.3% difference. The GeForce2 MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX) vs 350W (GeForce3 Ti 200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 160mm vs 183mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 60°C vs 60.

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
TDP	25W-88%	215W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	160mm	183mm
Height	111mm	100mm
Slots	1	1
Temp (Load)	60°C	60
Perf/Watt	0.1	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce2 MX came in at $129, while the GeForce3 Ti 200 launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce2 MX was 13.4% cheaper ($20 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.0 (GeForce2 MX) vs 0.0 (GeForce3 Ti 200) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 offers 0% better value. The newer card here is GeForce2 MX (2022 vs 2018).

Feature	GeForce2 MX	GeForce3 Ti 200
MSRP	$129-13%	$149
Performance per Dollar	0.0	0.0
Codename	GA107	TU104
Release	Maio 2022	September 20 2018
Ranking	#407	#94

Search GeForce2 MX on Amazon

Search GeForce3 Ti 200 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.