HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 64 BIT
HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 Driver
Hercules 3D Prophet XT or 3D Prophet II MX Which one should The MX should be better for games later on, due to the T&L engine. Plus, better. Does the 3D Prophet II MX series have full AGP 4X support? Why has Hercules used SDR memory rather than DDR memory for their 3D Prophet II MX card? Hercules budget graphics cards: 3D Prophet II MX, 3D Prophet XT and 3D Prophet DDR-DVI. Review date: 20 June Last modified Dec
|Supported systems:||ALL Windows 32x/64x|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Registration Required]|
HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 Driver
Instead of running at MHz, the core runs at a default speed of MHz. The memory, instead of running at MHz, now also runs at MHz.
But otherwise, it's the same old budget chip. Asus A7V motherboard, Via 4-in-1 drivers version 4.
Hercules budget graphics cards: 3D Prophet II MX400, 3D Prophet 4000XT and 3D Prophet DDR-DVI
Also performing as expected, the higher speed of the core and memory make for a small but noticeable performance increase from the original MX core. As usual, all the game tests are run in bit color. As I've mentioned before, Unreal Tournament's game engine depends highly on a fast CPU, so differences with high-end video cards are going to be minimal.
Next is Quake 3 Arena version 1. I think the Q3A results speak for themselves. Here you see the performance difference between the MX and MX, an especially sizeable difference more than 10 FPS in the lower resolutions, but the gap closes the further up you go. The last test we ran involved Interplay's Giantssame as the Kyro 2 review. The test involves a quick run through the multiplayer level "Three Way Island 1" from the Meccs team to catch the minimum and maximum framerates encountered.
Since Giants utilizes the Hardware TL capabilities of video cards, it can give us an idea of what to expect in future games as HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 as performance goes: First off, you might notice that these numbers are different from the previous reviews that this test was used in.
Hercules 3D Prophet II MX graphics card - GF2 MX - 32 MB Overview - CNET
This patch, in addition to whatever it is that patches do, gave an overall performance increase on every card that I tested on the new version. If the card's got a good enough cooler to handle a small core overclock, though, it's easy to get MX speed out of a plain MX. The MX does not have much more overclocking headroom than the plain MX; overclock 'em both and the HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 will probably still win, but the margin will, once again, be small enough not to really matter.
The MX is the low performance GeForce2 variant. Memory speed is a big performance limiting factor for most graphics cards at high resolutions.
Halving the memory speed means the MX in by will be working its memory about eight-tenths as hard as an MX or original MX card in by It'll be about as fast as any other MX in bytherefore; it'll start to fall away in byand be embarrassingly slow compared with better-equipped MXes in higher HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 than that. Why does anybody bother with the MXthen?
- VGA Legacy MKIII - NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
- Hercules - Support website
- Hercules 3D Prophet II MX 400 graphics card - GF2 MX 400 - 32 MB
- Warranty & Support
- 3D Prophet II MX 400
- Technical support website
So the MX lets manufacturers build computers which they can describe as having "GeForce2 graphics power! Never mind the fact that that "GeForce2 power" isn't actually very powerful at any half-decent resolution; there's a tick in the right box, and that's what matters to the mass market. If HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 got a 17 inch or smaller monitor and thus can't clearly view resolutions above byan MX or MX card will be pretty much as good as a full GeForce2 GTS.
The features the MX lacks don't have a big impact on performance, and only in higher resolutions will the DDR memory on the GTS board give it a big advantage. So the GeForce2 MX is a respectable performer, and good value for money.
But there are a pile of other MX and MX options, and you can get original MX cards with TV output and a couple of bundled games for a bit less than the price of the Hercules offering. It's a close-run thing, though, and the Prophet has a groovy blue circuit board and build quality that's certainly as good as that HERCULES 3D Prophet II MX 400 any of the smaller Taiwanese names.
So this is a perfectly good, workmanlike product; it's just not a big winner. It was never a red-hot sales dynamo for Hercules, but now it's really not attracting much attention.
Suspicious Activity Detected
For a start, this is a cheap card. So its list price is GeForce2 MX pricing, and its discounted price is a bargain in anyone's language.
The drivers used to be rather dodgy but they're pretty good now. For general gaming purposes, even at high resolutions, the Kyro II performs as well as, or better than, anything Nvidia can offer, on a bang-per-buck basis.
: Hercules 3D Prophet II MX: Electronics
So what's the original Kyro like compared with the Kyro II? Well, it's the same thing, only with a lower clock speed. That's the full extent of the difference. The newer chipset has more transistors and uses less power, but it essentially just does the same stuff faster. Both Kyro flavours thus share many qualities. Apart from their surprisingly good performance considering their modest RAM speedthey also render everything internally in 32 bit colour.
Solvusoft: Microsoft Gold Certified Company
This means that their 16 bit colour mode looks unusually good, but runs unusually slowly, compared with 32 bit. You might as well run in 32 bit all the time. Not bad for half the money, eh?