Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Riva TNT2 Pro Rage 128 Ultra 16MB
Red Dead Redemption 2 27336% 26650%
Halo: Reach 8618% 8400%
Cyberpunk 2077 37592% 36650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27336% 26650%
Doom Eternal 23490% 22900%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 37592% 36650%
Warcraft 3: Reforged 956% 930%
Grand Theft Auto VI 41823% 40775%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 37592% 36650%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 16823% 16400%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Rage 128 Ultra 16MB are marginally better than the Nvidia Riva TNT2 Pro.

The Riva TNT2 Pro was released over a year more recently than the 128 Ultra, and so the Riva TNT2 Pro is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the 128 Ultra.

Both GPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful GPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The Riva TNT2 Pro has 16 MB more video memory than the 128 Ultra, so is likely to be slightly better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the Riva TNT2 Pro also has superior memory performance overall.

The Riva TNT2 Pro has 1.7 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the 128 Ultra, which means that the memory performance of the Riva TNT2 Pro is marginally better than the 128 Ultra.

The Riva TNT2 Pro has 2 Shader Processing Units and the Rage 128 Ultra 16MB has 0. The two GPUs are based on different architectures, but deliver an equivalent shader performance. To compare, we must continue to look at the memory bandwidth, Texture and Pixel Rates. In this case, we sadly do not have enough data in this area to complete the comparison.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed143 MHzvs90 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureNV5-
OC Potential - vs None
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date12 Oct 1999vs01 Aug 1998
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

GPU Memory

Memory32 MBvs16 MB
Memory Speed166 MHzvs130 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs64 Bit
Memory TypeDDRvsDDR
Memory Bandwidth2.7GB/secvs1GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units2vs-
Actual Shader Performance-vs-
Technology-vs-
Texture Mapping Units-vs-
Texture Rate-vs-
Render Output Units-vs-
Pixel Rate-vs-
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)-vs1600x1200
VGA Connections0vs1
DVI Connections0vs-
HDMI Connections0vs-
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power--
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

DirectX6.0vs6
Shader Model-vs-
Open GL1.2vs1.2
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended Processor--
Recommended RAM--
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution--

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewThe RIVA TNT2 was a graphics processing unit manufactured by Nvidia starting in early 1999. The chip is codenamed "NV5" because it is the 5th graphics chip design by Nvidia, succeeding the RIVA TNT (NV4). RIVA is an acronym for Real-time Interactive Video and Animation accelerator. The "TNT" suffix refers to the chip's ability to work on two texels at once (TwiN Texel). Nvidia removed RIVA from the name later in the chip's lifetime.AMD desktop processors ignite the next generation of solutions. Whether it's playing games, cloud computing or editing home videos, enjoy a better experience with AMD multi-core processors.
Redefine the way you play on your desktop computer and take HD gaming to the extreme with the performance of ATI graphics cards from AMD.
Recommended CPU
-
-
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
-
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body