Comparison
The cards will be compared by looking at the hardware as well as software features, of course the 3D performance at default clock settings, there will be a heat comparison between the cards, overclocking is another important issue and finally there will be a closer look at the video output ability. There won't be a 2D benchmark comparison, because the 2D performance of all cards is identical, regardless if using Windows 9x or Windows NT.
Hardware Features
| Feature | Memory Size | Memory Type | Cooling | Video Out | Video In |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asus V3400TNT(/TV) | 16 MB | SDRAM | Active | Composite and S-VHS (optional) | Composite and S-VHS (optional) |
| Creative Graphics Blaster RIVA TNT | 16 MB | SDRAM | Passive | None | None |
| Diamond Viper V550 | 16 MB | SDRAM | Passive | S-VHS | None |
| Elsa ERAZOR II | 16 MB | SGRAM | Passive | None | None |
| Hercules Dynamite TNT | 16 MB | SDRAM | Active | None | None |
| STB Velocity 4400 | 16 MB | SDRAM | Passive | Composite and S-VHS | None |
From the hardware-features point of view, the Asus V3400TNT/TV is the clear winner. It's the only card that provides a video input and it comes with the best cooling device of all cards. Diamond's and STB's TNT card are both providing a video out feature, but it is less convenient as well as of lower quality compared to the Asus V3400TNT/TV. The only other card with an active heat sink next to the V3400TNT comes from Hercules, but so far there is no version of the Dynamite TNT available with video out. Elsa's Erazor II used to have an active heat sink in the first shipments, but now it comes with a passive heat sink only. The heat report will show why this seems to have been a bad move by Elsa. The Erazor II is the only card that is using the more expensive SGRAM instead of SDRAM. Unfortunately that does not influence 3D performance in any positive way.
