Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Riva TNT2 Pro Quadro FX 1000
Halo: Reach 8618% 2182%
Cyberpunk 2077 37592% 9766%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27336% 7081%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 16823% 4330%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27336% 7081%
Doom Eternal 23490% 6074%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 37592% 9766%
Grand Theft Auto VI 41823% 10873%
FIFA 20 14515% 3726%
Need For Speed Heat 27336% 7081%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia Quadro FX 1000 are massively better than the Nvidia Riva TNT2 Pro.

The Quadro FX 1000 was released over three years more recently than the Riva TNT2 Pro, and so the Quadro FX 1000 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Riva TNT2 Pro when running the latest games.

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 Quadro FX 1000 has 96 MB more video memory than the Riva TNT2 Pro, so is likely to be slightly better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the Quadro FX 1000 also has superior memory performance overall.

The Quadro FX 1000 has 6.9 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the Riva TNT2 Pro, which means that the memory performance of the Quadro FX 1000 is marginally better than the Riva TNT2 Pro.

Both the Riva TNT2 Pro and the Quadro FX 1000 have 2 Shader Processing Units. While the two GPUs have the same number of SPUs, the actual performance delivered by the Quadro FX 1000 is 1 and by the Riva TNT2 Pro is 1. Knowing that the shader performance of the Quadro FX 1000 is superior, it is not necessary to examine the GPUs' respective Texture and Pixel Fill Rates.

We would recommend a PSU with at least 300 Watts for the Quadro FX 1000, but we do not have a recommended PSU wattage for the Riva TNT2 Pro.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed143 MHzvs300 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureNV5NV30GL
OC Potential - vs -
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date12 Oct 1999vs21 Jan 2003
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

GPU Memory

Memory32 MBvs128 MB
Memory Speed166 MHzvs300 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeDDRvsDDR2
Memory Bandwidth2.7GB/secvs9.6GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units2vs2
Actual Shader Performance-vs0%
Technology-vs-
Texture Mapping Units-vs-
Texture Rate-vs-
Render Output Units-vs-
Pixel Rate-vs-
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)-vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs-
DVI Connections0vs-
HDMI Connections0vs-
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power--
Recommended PSU-300 Watts

GPU Features

DirectX6.0vs9.0b
Shader Model-vs3.0
Open GL1.2vs2.0
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.The Quadro line of GPU cards emerged in an effort at market segmentation by NVIDIA. In introducing Quadro, NVIDIA was able to charge a premium for essentially the same graphics hardware in professional markets, and direct resources to properly serve the needs of those markets. To differentiate their offerings, NVIDIA used driver software and firmware to enable features vital to segments of the workstation market; e.g., high performance anti-aliased lines and two-sided lighting were reserved for the Quadro product. In addition, improved support through a certified driver program was put in place. These features were of little value in the gaming markets that NVIDIA's products already sold to, but prevented high end customers from using the less expensive products. This practice continues even today although some products use higher capacity faster memory.
Recommended CPU
-
-
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
-
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body