Editing GeForce 2 series (section)

==GeForce 2 MX==
[[Image:GeForce2MX200AGP.JPG|thumb|GeForce 2 MX200 AGP]]
[[File:NVIDIA@180nm@Fixed-pipeline@NV11@GeForce2 MX400@Q26257.1 0315B3 Stack-DSC01049-DSC01078 - ZS-DMap (26336569015).jpg|thumb|Die shot of the MX400 GPU]]
Since the previous GeForce 256 line shipped without a budget variant, the [[RIVA TNT2]] series was left to fill the "low-end" role—albeit with a comparably obsolete feature set. In order to create a better low-end option, Nvidia created the GeForce 2 MX series (NV11), which offered a set of standard features similar to the regular GeForce 2 (NV15), limited only by categorical tier of lower performance. In order to reduce production costs, the GeForce 2 MX cards had two 3D pixel pipelines removed and a reduced available memory bandwidth. The cards utilized either SDR SDRAM or DDR SDRAM with memory bus widths ranging from 32 to 128&nbsp;bits, allowing circuit board cost to be varied. The MX series also provided dual-display support, something not found in the GeForce 256 and GeForce 2. With performance approaching the GeForce 256 while also being much more economical to produce, the GeForce 2 MX was successful in the OEM and budget market.

The prime competitors in the OEM and budget segment were ATI's [[Radeon R100|Radeon SDR]] (which with all other R100 chip-equipped cards, regardless of clock/memory speed and memory configuration, was later renamed collectively as Radeon 7200), [[Radeon R100|Radeon VE (RV100)]] (later renamed Radeon 7000), and the 3dfx Voodoo4 4500.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/721|title=ATI Radeon VE 32MB|first=Matthew|last=Witheiler|website=www.anandtech.com}}</ref> Sharing the same R100 GPU as the higher-end Radeon 32MB DDR (US$230), the Radeon SDR (US$150) was equipped with SDR SDRAM instead of DDR SDRAM found in its more expensive brethren although this did not bring down costs sufficiently to match the GeForce 2 MX.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/635/13|title=ATI Radeon 32MB SDR|first=Anand Lal|last=Shimpi|website=www.anandtech.com}}</ref> Released 3 months after the GeForce 2 MX, the Radeon SDR lacked multi-monitor support but exhibited faster 32-bit 3D rendering over the GeForce 2 MX.<ref>{{cite web |author=FastSite |url=http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/ati-radeon-sdr.html |title=ATI RADEON 32MB SDR Review |publisher=X-bit labs |date=December 27, 2000 |access-date=June 14, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080725085837/http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/ati-radeon-sdr.html |archive-date=July 25, 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref> 3dfx's Voodoo4 4500 arrived too late, as well as being too expensive at US$150, but too slow to compete with Nvidia or ATI's offerings, and also lacking multi-monitor support. Next up, the Radeon VE's RV100 GPU was cut down considerably from the R100 to reduce production costs, so it did not offer hardware [[Transform and lighting|T&L]], an emerging 3D rendering feature of the day that was the major attraction of Direct3D 7. Further, the Radeon VE featured only a single rendering pipeline, causing it to produce a substantially lower fillrate than the GeForce 2 MX. However the Radeon VE (US$100) had the advantage of somewhat better dual-monitor display software while matching the GeForce 2 MX on price.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/721/12|title=ATI Radeon VE 32MB|first=Matthew|last=Witheiler|website=www.anandtech.com}}</ref>

Members of the series include ''GeForce 2 MX'', ''MX400'', ''MX200'', and ''MX100''. The GPU was also used as an integrated graphics processor in the [[nForce]] chipset line and as a mobile graphics chip for notebooks called ''GeForce 2 Go''.

The NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400 is often considered underwhelming because of its limited capabilities. With just 32 MB of SDR memory and an outdated architecture based on the Celsius design, it struggles to perform efficiently. Its low GPU clock speed of 200 MHz and support for only DirectX 7.0 further hamper its ability to handle modern games and applications. In the context of today's technology, the GeForce2 MX 400 is seen as outdated and insufficient for most graphic-intensive tasks.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-02-12 |title=NVIDIA GeForce2 MX Specs |url=https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce2-mx.c792 |access-date=2025-02-12 |website=TechPowerUp |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Witheiler |first=Matthew |title=NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400 64MB |url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/751/8 |access-date=2025-02-12 |website=www.anandtech.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author1=Silvino Orozco |date=2000-06-29 |title=Full Review of NVIDIA's GeForce2 MX |url=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/full-review-nvidia,204.html |access-date=2025-02-12 |website=Tom's Hardware |language=en}}</ref>