- Feb 10, 2002
- 2,674
- 0
- 0
From what we have seen thus far, the cards offer excellent performance at an exceptional price
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Err yah I thought the 9200 WAS DX9 compatible. I'll read up on it some more I guess.. All of these 9xxx are starting to blur but I assumed the 9 at the beginning of the 9xxx was meant to denote DX9 compatibility.
EDIT: Now that I think about it... the 9000 isnt dx9 compatibile is it?
EDIT: Now that I think about it... the 9000 isnt dx9 compatibile is it?
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Looks like RV280 (Radeon 9200) will have problems competing against the FX 5200, simply because the former is simply a DX8.1 card.
Anyone guess the memory bandwidth of the Radeon 9600 PRO based on what info we have?
With so many features packed into this family of GPU's, one has to wonder how successful these graphics cards will prove to be in benchmarks. Unfortunately, we cannot release any benchmark results at this time. However, you can expect a full review of the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra and GeForce FX 5200 Ultra next Monday with some comparison boards thrown in for good measure.
From what we have seen thus far, the cards offer excellent performance at an exceptional price. Though these models fail to blow-away the previous generation of cards without any image-quality settings such as FSAA or Anisotropic Filtering, it is a whole different story once those settings are enabled. As the resolution rises and these settings increase, the true potential of these cards is realized. We certainly want to compare the new ATi 9600 series to the NVIDIA cards as well, but while the 9600 series was announced last night, we have have yet to see any working samples on our test bench.
Overall, it looks as though NVIDIA has possibly struck gold with their latest additions to the GeForce FX family of GPU's. Kudos to NVIDIA for bringing DX9 home to the mainstream masses. I have to think they will be loved for doing it. And let's face it, mainstream is where all the profit dollars are made anyway. Drive for show and putt for dough...right?
Originally posted by: 308nato
The $79 price tag for a DX9 capable card will definitely carry it well for the mainstream (5200).
Originally posted by: 308nato
The $79 price tag for a DX9 capable card will definitely carry it well for the mainstream (5200).
Should be very interesting battle with the 5600U, as it has a bandwidth of 11.2 GB/S which isn't that far off the 5800 non-U. Both have 4 x 1 pipeline architecture and fast core and mem clocks. Should be a nice competition for the middle-market.
However, we can already give you some of our first impressions about the performance of the new cards. In the standard tests without FSAA and anitotropic filtering, the FX 5600 Ultra seems to be just about the same or slower than a GeForce 4 Ti 4200 8x and Radeon 9500 PRO. This might be due to the reduced pixel pipelines (2x2 as opposed to 4x2). With 4xFSAA, it appears to reach nearly double the performance of the 4200, beating a 4800 as well, but it loses out to the Radeon 9500 PRO. It's a similar picture with the anisotropic filtering. In the pixel shader tests from 3D Mark 2001, it beats the 4200/2800, but loses in the vertex shader tests. In both tests, it clearly loses to the Radeon 9500 PRO.
The FX 5200 Ultra is quite a bit slower than the 5600 Ultra in the standard tests. In anti-aliasing, it's just a tad behing the Ti 4200. It's the same with anisotropic filtering - at least in Balanced mode. In Performance mode, it even manages to beat the 4800.
So im guessing the 5200 FX is faster than the GF4 Ti4600's? If so how much cheaper will they be?
It might be a silly question but i just wanna make sure nVidia hasnt done sumthing gay like they did with the GF4 mx's which turn out being no fastr than a GF2 Ultra
So just to make sure, the 5200 FX (Not Ultra), the one with the passive heatsink, this is faster than a Ti4600 right?
Originally posted by: MrFiTTy
So im guessing the 5200 FX is faster than the GF4 Ti4600's? If so how much cheaper will they be?
It might be a silly question but i just wanna make sure nVidia hasnt done sumthing gay like they did with the GF4 mx's which turn out being no fastr than a GF2 Ultra
So just to make sure, the 5200 FX (Not Ultra), the one with the passive heatsink, this is faster than a Ti4600 right?
Dan
Originally posted by: paralazarguer
tomshardware got theirs up before poor anandtech.
Until then, NVIDIA has placed an embargo on benchmarking.