VIDEOLOGIC VIVID XS KYRO 2 REVIEW

"Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 review tested against the Palit Daytona GeForce2 MX. Video cards tested on a system using a 1.3Ghz Athlon and a JETWAY 663AS PRO. Software used was:- Max Payne, Quake 3 Arena and Serious Sam."

GENERAL SYSTEM INFORMATION

PROCESSOR	AMD ATHLON 1.3GHZ
VIDEO CARD	VIDEOLOGIC VIVID XS KYRO 2
	PALIT DAYTONA GEFORCE2 MX 32MB AGP
POWERVR DRIVER	v1.04.14.0028
NVIDIA DRIVER	DETONATOR v23.11
MOTHERBOARD	JETWAY 663AS PRO
MEMORY	512MB SAMSUNG PC-133 SDRAM
OPERATING SYSTEM	WINDOWS 98 SE
DIRECTX VERSION	v8.1

QUAKE III ARENA

640x480x32

	103
	107

800x600x32

	77
	107

1024x768x32

	50
	97

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "Using 32bit we witness the Palit GeForce2 MX being beaten at ALL resolutions due to it's limited bandwidth. The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 starts off strongly and at 800x600 is already 30fps faster and at 1024x768 the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 gains an impressive 47fps advantage over the Palit GeForce2 MX."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Default GLdriver
GL Extensions on
Fullscreen on
Four.dm68 Benchmark

NORMAL QUALITY
32Bit Colour Depth
32Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
Geometic Detail Medium
Texture Detail 75%
Bilinear Texture Filtering

QUAKE III ARENA

640x480x32

	95
	107

800x600x32

	70
	100

1024x768x32

	45
	71

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "Let's use 32bit and Trilinear to see what these two video cards can really do. The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 takes an early lead of 12fps at 640x480, then at 800x600 this has stretched to 30fps and then at 1024x768 it's 26fps. The Palit GeForce2 MX is very bandwidth limited at anything above 640x480 which is disappointing."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Default GLdriver
GL Extensions on
Fullscreen on
Four.dm68 Benchmark

NORMAL QUALITY
32Bit Colour Depth
32Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
Geometic Detail Medium
Texture Detail 75%
Trilinear Texture Filtering

QUAKE III ARENA

BILINEAR

	70
	119

TRILINEAR

	64
	112

ANISOTROPIC

	58
	41

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "Let's investigate the performance gain or loss using different filtering methods with the Palit GeForce2 MX and the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2. The Palit GeForce2 MX loses 6fps going from Bilinear to Trilinear and a further 6fps going from Trilinear to Anisotropic. In total the Palit GeForce2 MX loses only 12fps going from Bilinear to Anisotropic filtering. The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 starts off strongly losing only 7fps going from Bilinear to Trilinear but when going from Trilinear to Anisotropic the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 loses a massive 71fps. Anisotropic is an option with Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 owners should never enable."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Default GLdriver
GL Extensions on
Fullscreen on
Four.dm68 Benchmark

HIGH QUALITY
800x600 Video Mode
32Bit Colour Depth
32Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
High Geometic Detail
Full Texture Detail
Trilinear Texture Filtering

QUAKE III ARENA

640x480x32

	10
	0

800x600x32

	13
	7

1024x768x32

	9
	23

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "It's been confirmed with these tests that the Palit GeForce2 MX has a major bandwidth problem, let's turn on texture compression to see if things change. The Palit GeForce2 MX gains between 9fps to 13fps , once again the sweet spot for this video card is 800x600. The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 gains nothing for using texture compression at 640x480, only 7fps for 800x600 but at 1024x768 it gets an impressive 23fps increase. If you like running games at high resolutions then turning on texture compression will give your games a nice boost with the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Default GLdriver
GL Extensions on
Fullscreen on
Four.dm68 Benchmark

NORMAL QUALITY
32Bit Colour Depth
32Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
Geometic Detail Medium
Texture Detail 75%
Trilinear Texture Filtering

MAX PAYNE

640x480x32

	62
	63

800x600x32

	46
	62

1024x768x32

	30
	57

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "Using 32bit the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 beats the Palit GeForce2 MX at ALL resolutions regardless of hardware t&l, at 1024x768 the Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 is 27fps faster."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Truck Exploding Demo
Normal Setting
Trilinear Filtering
Fogging Enabled
Sounds Enabled
Task Switching Disabled
Triple Screen Buffers Enabled

SERIOUS SAM

640x480x32

	75
	83

800x600x32

	47
	80

1024x768x32

	29
	76

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 beats the Palit GeForce2 MX at ALL resolutions, I guess the Palit GeForce2 MX is only powerful enough to run games at 16bit or at low resolutions."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS
Normal Setting
UHSS Demo
Huge Texture Size
Detailed Textures Enabled
Huge Shadowmap Size
Standard Lens Flare
No Wait Vertical Retrace
Wide Screen Disabled

FSAA PERFORMANCE

640x480

MAX PAYNE (2x)

	36
	62

MAX PAYNE (4x)

	22
	47

QUAKE 3 ARENA (2x)

	48
	95

QUAKE 3 ARENA (4x)

	31
	50

SERIOUS SAM (2x)

	35
	84

SERIOUS SAM (4x)

	21
	68

PALIT GEFORCE2 MX VIDEOLOGIC VIVIDXS

COMMENT - "Let's throw FSAA (full scene anti-aliasing) into the equation and see what happens. Well this is amazing, I think the figures speak for themselves really. The Palit GeForce2 MX just doesn't have the power to do FSAA and still run games at playable frame rates. The Videologic VividXS Kyro 2 however has no problems delivering playable framerates with FSAA enabled which is very impressive."

CONCLUSION - "The Kyro 2 is a budget speed demon especially using 32bit and at high resolutions. You only have to look at the 32bit benchmark's to see how easily it beats the GeForce2 MX. The FSAA scores detailed above are especially impressive for a budget video card, no longer will FSAA be a feature which makes your games turn into a slideshow. For even more speed you only have to enable texture compression and the Kyro 2 will offer you GeForce2 GTS speeds without the high price!
GOOD POINTS
• Amazing budget price $58 (£62) on www.pricewatch.com
• Excellent 32bit, FSAA and high resolution performance.
• Excellent 2D, 32bit and 16bit image quality.
• Excellent and very frequent driver support.

BAD POINTS
• Lack of hardware t&l does effect performance in some games.
• Anisotropic filtering takes a large performance hit."