Contact us! Links Archive Music Hardware Gaming News Digital Silence

detonator.jpg banner1 erazorx.jpg
GeForce Driver Comparison (updated 4-2-00) If you would like to support this site, visit Crucial today Elsa Erazor X2 Review

Elsa Erazor X2 Review (page 4)


The heart of any review is usually the benchmarks...just what kind of performance can a given piece of hardware be expected to attain. In the case of the Erazor X2, the results are impressive. The test rig was as follows:

Elsa Erazor X2 (with 5.13 reference drivers)
Pentium 3-600E
256MB Crucial PC133 memory
Abit BF6 motherboard
Maxtor 15GB (7200RPM)
Windows 98 SE

For this part of the review, the processor and video were run at default speeds. I chose the 5.13 reference drivers because they offer the best perfromance (though there a few graphical anomalies) and should be officially available shortly.

3D Mark 2000

Though it is a synthetic benchmark, it is quite easy to test the Direct3D capabilities of a video card with 3D Mark 2000 from MadOnion. Benchmark was run in "Default" mode. The test results are shown below.

3D Mark

CPU Mark

Game 1 Low Detail

Game 1 High Detail



98.9 fps

35.8 fps

Quake 3

To test the OpenGL capabilities of the Erazor X2, Quake 3 was used. The first set of marks are with quality settings at "high" (32-bit colordepth/32-bit textures and trilinear filtering enabled). The 16-bit settings were based on the "fastest" option.

Color Depth





1280x1024 1600x1200

89 fps

83 fps

63 fps

47 fps

35 fps 22 fps
16-bit 96 fps 95 fps 92 fps 88 fps 76 fps 55 fps

You can see in the 16-bit settings, that at lower resolutions, the CPU was the limiting factor and thus there was no change in framerate between 640 and 800. I tested the 1024x768 "high" settings in an intense 11 player game and gameplay was as smooth as silk. No reason to turn down any options with this card. For the full benchmarks results including additional OpenGL testing, please visit the GeForce Driver Comparison.


What's Included

Previous   DVD Playback   Next