Ook onze vriend Anand heeft een review van de GeForce 256 op z'n site geparkeerd. Zoals gewoonlijk weer véél benchmarks, waarbij de kaart ook werd getest op een Athlon 700 systeem. Het door Anand geteste GeForce model beschikt over normaal SDRAM en in de meeste tests blijkt de framerate dan ook nauwelijks hoger te zijn als die van de TNT2 Ultra. Memory bandwidth in combinatie met slecht ontwikkelde drivers vormen het grootste probleem:
The drivers are the downfall to the GeForce 256's Direct3D performance. In some cases the performance difference between the GeForce 256 and the TNT2 Ultra was absolutely nothing and in other cases the GeForce 256 was actually slower than the TNT2 Ultra. These issues are entirely driver related and will be resolved within the upcoming weeks. For this reason we omitted the Celeron scores which proved nothing other than the fact that the TNT2 Ultra was 0.5 fps faster than the GeForce 256 due to the lack of good GeForce 256 drivers. NVIDIA has had their OpenGL ICD for a while now which makes the OpenGL part of the GeForce's drivers not as bad of a situation as the state of their Direct3D performance. Once again, there is no reason to get worried about these issues as they are completely driver related.
Looking at the Athlon 700 and Pentium III 600B scores we truly see the potential of the GeForce 256. Expendable is a very CPU dependent benchmark which unfortunately means that the reader must do a little more work in order to extract meaning from the numbers. A difference of 2 fps in the Expendable timedemo is a considerable performance advantage and shouldn't be dismissed as a "mere" 2 fps increase. This 2 fps increase could result in a much larger performance increase overall during actual gameplay.
The memory bandwidth issue from the OpenGL testing is present in the Direct3D benchmarks as well, where the Matrox G400MAX with its 200MHz SGRAM outpaces the GeForce 256 in 32-bit color at higher resolutions.