TNT vs TNT2 M64

Discussion about old graphics cards, monitors and video related things.

TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby cxm717 » 2018-11-03 @ 16:55

Okay, so I was interested in how these cards compare and decided to benchmark each in a few games. I thought I would share my results here.

The cards compared are a 16MB Creative TNT (CT6710), a Gainward 32MB TNT2 M64 and a Compaq 16MB TNT2 M64. Both TNT2 M64 cards were run at 125MHz/143MHz clocks.

I tested them on an Intel d815eea motherboard with 256MB PC133@CL2, a P3s@1.4GHz and a Creative sound blaster live. The drivers I used were det 2.08.

Some pics of the cards and setup: https://imgur.com/a/UK0rKa3

all.png


Edit: Added pics
User avatar
cxm717
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-11-21 @ 04:17

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby clueless1 » 2018-11-03 @ 19:28

Very cool, thanks for posting this! From a playability standpoint, there's not much difference between the three. I'm kind of surprised the 16MB TNT2 outscores the 32MB version as often as it does.
User avatar
clueless1
l33t
 
Posts: 3780
Joined: 2015-12-22 @ 17:43
Location: Midwest US

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby cxm717 » 2018-11-03 @ 22:07

Yeah, I was surprised with the 16MB M64 also. I figured it would be slower than the 32MB card, at least with higher resolutions.
User avatar
cxm717
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-11-21 @ 04:17

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby cxm717 » 2018-11-03 @ 22:14

I ended up testing a few other cards in the system, to see how they compare with the M64 also. The cards I compared it with are a Matrox G450 32MB AGP and a Rage128GL 16MB AGP. The G450 is clocked at 120/150 MHz, somewhat lower than I have seen with other G450 cards. I figured it would be close to the M64 as it's the slowest Matrox G4x0 card, especially with these clocks.

here are the results:
all.png
User avatar
cxm717
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-11-21 @ 04:17

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby mwdmeyer » 2018-11-03 @ 22:14

Awesome thanks for this! I remember hearing the M64 was similar to the OG TNT but it is good to know.

M64 got a lot of hate but isn't bad if the resolution is low.
Vogons Wiki - http://vogonswiki.com
User avatar
mwdmeyer
Member
 
Posts: 314
Joined: 2012-3-06 @ 11:35
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby vvbee » 2018-11-03 @ 23:55

Vs the geforce 4 ti4200: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNFDYFBNd-4
Overclocked at 640 x 480 in rally trophy (2001): high details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUkFi3OxXto, low details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhj37jnZdH4.

The capture's a bit crap, but the low details rally trophy one looks retro as.
User avatar
vvbee
Oldbie
 
Posts: 581
Joined: 2017-2-06 @ 17:56

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby Ozzuneoj » 2018-11-06 @ 01:53

Thanks for doing these tests! This is great stuff! I think I'm actually going to bookmark your recent benchmark posts for future reference. :)
Time Machine = FIC PA-2013 2.1 - K6-2 500 - 256MB PC-100 - TNT2 Pro 16MB AGP - Labway Yamaha YMF719-E - Midiman MM401
Amibay For Sale Threads
I have lots of PC stuff for sale on Mercari! Get a $10 sign up credit with invite code VBGQMM.
User avatar
Ozzuneoj
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 2016-3-16 @ 21:33

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby Almoststew1990 » 2018-11-06 @ 07:14

There is also an Anandtech review which compares the M64 to the proper TNT2.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/393
Intel 4770K 4.4GHz | 8GB DDR3 2133MHz | AMD 390X | 750GB EVO SSD
Intel E8500 3.1GHz | 3GB DDR2 | Nvidia GeForce 645 1024MB | 750GB HDD
Slot A Athlon 800MHz | 256MB PC100 | Voodoo 3 2000 | SB Live! 5.1
User avatar
Almoststew1990
Member
 
Posts: 329
Joined: 2017-3-14 @ 19:48
Location: Southampton, UK

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby appiah4 » 2019-3-15 @ 06:51

I just stumbled across this post while doing a Google search and wanted to thank the OP for it, amazingly informative. I was dumbfounded to see the original TNT performing close to a G450 at 16bit, but at 32bit at least the gap becomes meaningful.
1989:A500|1M|ACA500+|C1084S
1992:HIPPO-VL+|U5SX-33|8M|GD5428|CT2290|S2
1995:P5I430VX|P133|32M|T64+/MX2|V1|CT3980/32M
1998:S1573S|K6-2/400|64M|RagePro|V2/SLI|CT4500/32M
2001:GA-6OXT|PIII-1200|512M|GF3Ti200|MX300
2004:K8VD|3700+|2G|X1950P|SB0350
User avatar
appiah4
l33t
 
Posts: 3029
Joined: 2017-2-19 @ 07:36

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby cxm717 » 2019-3-16 @ 05:13

appiah4 wrote:I just stumbled across this post while doing a Google search and wanted to thank the OP for it, amazingly informative.


Thanks.

I was dumbfounded to see the original TNT performing close to a G450 at 16bit, but at 32bit at least the gap becomes meaningful.


Yeah the G450 is a bit odd, I think. It ends up being slower than you might expect just looking at the specs of the card (compared to the other G400 cards). In Quake2 at 640x480x16 the G400Max is 50% faster than the G450. I'll post the graphs with the G400Max later.
User avatar
cxm717
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-11-21 @ 04:17

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby cxm717 » 2019-3-16 @ 05:20

I actually did a comparison with a reg TNT2 (125/150) that I was going to post in this thread but forgot. So here it is:

allwtnt2.png


The results here for the M64 cards was all retested. I mainly did that to make sure my original results were correct.
User avatar
cxm717
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-11-21 @ 04:17

Re: TNT vs TNT2 M64

Postby lost77 » 2019-3-16 @ 16:22

Thanks for the benchmarks.

I replaced a TNT for a TNT2 M64 32MB back in 1999. This was mostly to get the extra RAM.

Seeing these benchmarks the upgrade only made sense at settings that I would consider unplayable.Maybe less micro-stuttering in some games with 32MB.

Good thing I got it for free.
User avatar
lost77
Newbie
 
Posts: 54
Joined: 2018-9-24 @ 23:01


Return to Video

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests