Got my FX5900 today... *UPDATE - OC'd to 500/990*

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
[rant]It's freaking 3DMark people, it doesn't matter. Games matter. Play games and show your $250 card off that way. [/rant]

While your right, it's a GREAT indicator of average performance, and puts you on a scale of where you should be...

"Freakin gamers"

Aside from that, it's a good way to tell if new drivers actually helped, or if they hurt, or if your overclock is worth the increase in heat. Ya know, ifyou go from say 55 C to 70 C and gain only 5% performance, that's not really worth it.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Well, I think I've got it running as fast as I'm gonna push it past 500/990 (GPU is nice and cool, and doesn't seem to be having any problems, but I'm afraid to push it harder)

AquaMark3 - 45,525... others will come as I complete them.

3DMark2003 - 6,302

3DMark2001 - 16,709

jeff, although you are getting better scores in 3dmark, the IQ from det 50 is just plain bad. i recommend a lower 3d mark score and better IQ with det 4X.XX

 

[THUGSROOK]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
[rant]It's freaking 3DMark people, it doesn't matter. Games matter. Play games and show your $250 card off that way. [/rant]

While your right, it's a GREAT indicator of average performance, and puts you on a scale of where you should be...

"Freakin gamers"

Aside from that, it's a good way to tell if new drivers actually helped, or if they hurt, or if your overclock is worth the increase in heat. Ya know, ifyou go from say 55 C to 70 C and gain only 5% performance, that's not really worth it.

not these days.
nvidia has cheated 3dmark2001 so much, that the lowest scoring drivers (45.23) are the way to go for best IQ. but then again the 45.23s cheat @ aquamark3, so there is no clear best driver right now. they either cheat in something, cheat in something else, or dont yet work for that game/benchmark.

its sad

i still say go with the 45.23s tho

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
[rant]It's freaking 3DMark people, it doesn't matter. Games matter. Play games and show your $250 card off that way. [/rant]

While your right, it's a GREAT indicator of average performance, and puts you on a scale of where you should be...

"Freakin gamers"

Aside from that, it's a good way to tell if new drivers actually helped, or if they hurt, or if your overclock is worth the increase in heat. Ya know, ifyou go from say 55 C to 70 C and gain only 5% performance, that's not really worth it.

not these days.
nvidia has cheated 3dmark2001 so much, that the lowest scoring drivers (45.23) are the way to go for best IQ. but then again the 45.23s cheat @ aquamark3, so there is no clear best driver right now. they either cheat in something, cheat in something else, or dont yet work for that game/benchmark.

its sad

i still say go with the 45.23s tho

That's what I'm talkin' 'bout Been using the 45.23's since Thugs recommended them to me and they seem to be the best balanced considering the issues with nVidia's Det's :frown:

 

[Jeff7181]

I was using 51.75's... provided good performance and allowed me to overclock the RAM to 990... I'm back to using the 45.23's because the 51.75's didn't render fog properly in Soldier of Fortune 2. Although it was fun, because it gave me an advantage (almost pure white background for enemies to show up on, hehe)... it wasn't good, lol. So I switched to the 45.23's and it works fine now. Strange though since there's been talk of the 5X drivers NOT rendering fog where it should. Other than that, I didn't notice ANY difference in image quality... granted I didn't take screen shots and blow them up 1000% to compare pixels like some people and review sites do. All I care about is that it looks good while I'm playing it, not under a microscope... and it definately looks good no matter what driver I use.

The biggest thing I noticed is that light seems to be more accurate... like in Soldier of Fortune 2, if your familiar with that game... the map Jordan Market... take Red's spawn to the right, look down the long alleyway and down the hill into the tunnel... with my GF4, it was relatively bright even in the tunnel from way back there... now it appears very dark with the GF FX.

The lighting anomolies in CS have gone away too... light use to shine through the ceiling of the tunnel in Dust in a certain area with my GF4, doesn't anymore.

 

[Eagle17]

I am happy to see that you are enjoying this card, even though I dissagreed with your reasons to get it. I am suprised at the amount of overclock you are getting on it, and the problems you are having with some of the drivers. In the end all that matters is that you are happy with your purchase and that seems to be the case...

 

[smittybg]

the 4523 are really slow compared older drivers. Nvidia is more worried abou t quality of the graphics than the FPs that there card generate.

 

[Jeff7181]

Not REALLY slow... I'm able to run Soldier of Fortune 2 at 1024x768 with all details set to max and 4XAA and 8XAF without my FPS dropping below 85, which I have locked it at because that's what my refresh rate is.

I haven't done any measurements in BF1942 yet... but I assume the same will be true... although I will only be running 2XAA in that game due to 4X scrambling the text to the point that it's unreadable, and chatting with others online while playing is half the fun =)

I'd tell you a little about FS2004 performance, but there are so many things to customize in that game that it would take too much time to list every setting. But long story short, details are set at about 75% of max, with 8XAF, Tri-linear filtering, and the game enabled AA, which looks like 2X to me. (setting 4X in the drivers causes certain portions of menus not to show up for some reason)

Hmmm, what else... oh yeah... I run Morrowind at 4XAA, 8XAF at 1024x768 with all details set to max and get 40+ fps depending on what I'm looking at.

Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield runs at 60 FPS with 4XAA and 8XAF at the same resolution with all details set to max.

Combat Flight Simulator 2: WWII Pacific Theater runs at over 85 fps... (I've never seen it drop below 85, even with lots of enemy aircraft on the screen) and goes up to 120 when I'm flying over open ocean by myself.

Oh yeah... and CS NEVER drops below 85 FPS, which I have locked it at again due to my refresh rate... even with 2 smoke bombs on the screen and 7-8 other players.

Hmmm, that's about all the game testing I've done so far. I don't have UT2k3 or I would run those benchmarks... I may pick it up soon though, we'll see after this months bills =)

 

[Big Lar]

Nice card Jeff, any idea what tne mem speed of the chips are?

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: smittybg
Nvidia is more worried abou t quality of the graphics than the FPs that there card generate.

That's really not the case--not now, and not since the FX was released.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: smittybg
the 4523 are really slow compared older drivers. Nvidia is more worried abou t quality of the graphics than the FPs that there card generate.

LOL, i hope you're being sarcastic

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Big Lar
Nice card Jeff, any idea what tne mem speed of the chips are?

It's 2.2ns RAM according to specs. It ran fine at 990 Mhz... but this 45.23 driver won't let me run higher than 950... oh well, maybe it's for my own good =) Although I'm able to run the core at 520 :Q