Theoretical performance—by the specs
Before we get into the graphs, let's take a look at some charts to see what exactly the 315's theoretical performance bottlenecks are. Up first: fill rate.

Like the GeForce2 MX, the 315 has two pixel pipelines and can apply two textures per pixel. At least theoretically, only its slower 166MHz clock speed keeps the 315 behind the GF2 MX in fill rate. ATI's low-end Radeon VE and STMicro's Kyro both lag in the fill rate department.

Theoretical fill rate isn't everything, though. Memory bandwidth is far more important when it comes to real-world fill rate—and thus performance.

The Radeon VE is the only card with DDR memory in our comparison, but it's hampered by a 64-bit bus width. All in all, the theoretical memory bandwidth limits are very similar here.

This is all just theoretical, though. The real test of a card lies with benchmarks rather than comparisons of architectural limitations.

Our testing methods
Our test system was built using the following components:

Pentium 4 test system
Processor Intel Pentium 4 1.7GHz (Socket 478 Package)
Front-side bus 400MHz ("Quad-pumped" 100MHz)
Motherboard Shuttle AB30/R
Chipset Intel 845
North bridge Brookdale MCH Hub
South bridge ICH2
Memory size 256MB (single DIMM)
Memory type Micron PC133 CAS2
Graphics Evil Sam 32MB (WinXP 3.15 Drivers)
Evil Kyro 64MB (WinXP 1.0.8.165 Drivers)
Asus V7100 GeForce2 MX (WinXP 21.83 Drivers)
ATI Radeon VE (WinXP 6.13.3276 Drivers)
Sound CMI 8738/PCI-6ch-LX 3D Audio (on board)
Storage IBM 60GXP 40GB 7200RPM ATA/100 hard drive
OS Microsoft Windows XP
OS updates None

With Windows XP officially out the door, it's time to put Windows 2000 to pasture as a test platform. As good as Windows 2000 is, the benefits of XP can't be denied.

Before you start moaning about the lack of an Athlon test platform in this review, pause. The 315 is likely going to see a lot of action on the OEM front, and that means it'll invariably be paired with low-end Intel systems on the Intel's Brookdale SDR platform. (Plus, I only have one Athlon test rig, and it's doing something more exciting at the moment, the results of which will be graphed for you shortly.)

We used the following versions of our test applications:

The test system's Windows desktop was set at 1024x768 in 32-bit colour at a 75Hz screen refresh rate. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests. Unless otherwise indicated, all tests were performed with all the visual options turned to their highest levels.

All the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.