You won't feel the difference, take the sexiest one 😀

If Wikipedia is anything to go by, the Pro should be a somewhat faster card. Either card should be a good fit though. I'd probably just get the GTS and overclock it a bit if I'm feeling really desperate for the extra speed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_2_series

http://www.anandtech.com/show/678/3 awesome article, shows that the Pro is the way to go. Most likely only marginally faster but hey! I have to agree with suniac, take the sexiest one that looks good with your rig and upgrade to a faster card later on.

Even though the Asus Geforce 2 Pro seems to be a nice card, then i guess i'm with you guys and i'll get the GTS flavor.
Also, if i'm not mistaken the GTS version gained more popularity at the time than the Pro version even if faster. Maybe the price was to blame.
The Leadtek Geforce 2 GTS has a nice chunky cooler, it should give a good headroom for a small overclock.

I would choose the one with the bigger cooler/better fan, since fans on video cards tend to die a lot.

I'd go the Pro if you really had to choose between those 2 specific cards but to be honest, a Geforce 4 TI4200, TI4400 or TI4600 is going to give you much better performance than a Geforce 2 will any day. Especially since you're running a Pentium 4. You could almost move up to the FX series.

PS: I have that exact Asus Geforce2 Pro card, have yet to test it out but I loved the fact that it matches alot of Pentium2-3 era motherboard PCB's. There is nothing I hate more than a yellowish green motherboard with a bright red GPU. Just a minor pet peeve x)

borgie83 wrote:

I'd go the Pro if you really had to choose between those 2 specific cards but to be honest, a Geforce 4 TI4200, TI4400 or TI4600 is going to give you much better performance than a Geforce 2 will any day. Especially since you're running a Pentium 4. You could almost move up to the FX series.

I'm not really looking to get the fastest possible really, just something more or less "contemporary accurate" wise. I know that for 2001 i could even get a Geforce 3 but that came out a bit later that year if i'm correct. Besides that, a geforce 2 is a bit cheaper and not too out of place on this system at all regarding the year 2001.

Fair enough. Well don't disregard Geforce 2 TI's are they are quite cheap and readily available. I've actually got 2 Leadtek Geforce 2 TI's for sale which are new in box for $30 each. They're slightly faster than the GTS and PRO.

New as in "never opened\used"?
Unboxed?

the Pro is better, while the Ti and Ultra are better than that . of course, something more suitable is a Geforce 3 or 4 .but thats something else

Performance will be very similar and I too would recommend a Ti 4200 instead. But, if you really have to pick only one of the two, pick the one with the best image quality. Speed won't really make a difference, but Nvidia had a nasty reputation for shit IQ back then. I think the ASUS is a better bet.

rick6 wrote:

New as in "never opened\used"?
Unboxed?

Hi the boxes are without shrinkwrap so open box but are complete. Comes with a game, software, cable, manual and the card itself. PM me for the link if you like.

My P4 originally had an Asus GF2MX - it lasted about 5 years. Was a good card though (I don't know why it died, but it didn't happen in-use). My Leadtek GF6 had a chunky cooler, the fan died and I didn't even notice; afaik that card still works (its been in storage a while). I'd agree with going with the bigger/fatter cooler when possible. Especially with older cards it can sometimes be a savior in the event of a dead fan. Currently that P4 has an FX in it - performance is more than it needs, but it gets me pixel shaders and AA which is nice.

Some older cards can render effects in some games that newer cards can not. does this apply with Geforce 2 vs Geforce 4?

cdoublejj wrote:

Some older cards can render effects in some games that newer cards can not. does this apply with Geforce 2 vs Geforce 4?

You mean like 3dfx did with detail textures + fog on unreal\unreal tournament and never really worked all that well on nvidia\ati cards?

I bought the geforce gts 2 card, it will be noticiably better at 1024x768 vs the geforce 256 DDR it has at the moment i guess.

cdoublejj wrote:

Some older cards can render effects in some games that newer cards can not. does this apply with Geforce 2 vs Geforce 4?

I don't think so - afaik with GF2->NV2x there's no good reason to avoid NV2x beyond historical accuracy or economic availability. NV2x adds LMA, PS support (this will actually mean GF3/4 can do effects in some games that older cards cannot), MSAA, etc but I haven't found anything that talks it about it explicitly removing anything. And remember the NV1x went on to become the GeForce 4 MX, so forward-looking driver support for both families should be pretty consistent, although GF2 will support a range of older (pre-NV2x) drivers ofc.