5900<9800 , 5600<9600. gamepc review

[jjyiz28]

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=3x5900u&page=1

no point getting nvidia's offerings, unless you're a die hard fan. 5900 performs closer to 9700, and even that, 9700 wins majority. 5600 just gets beat all around by 9600.

 

[nick1985]

maybe they meant the "ultra" versions of the card

 

[stardust]

the Geforce FX 5600 ULTRA in that review is Rev1, maybe because the difference between the ULTRA and non-ULTRA is far smaller than the other reviews i've seen on the geforce FX 5600 ULTRA rev2. When ppl claim that the 5600 ultra beats the 9600, they mean Rev2

 

[oldfart]

While this certainly could change in the next few months, the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra market is fairly boring as of today. We're seeing no innovation, nothing to drive the market forward, and considering that full, shipping GeForceFX 5900 Ultra cards perform at lower levels in comparison to the Radeon 9800 Pro in every test we threw at them, it's just impossible for us to recommend the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra. If you have a choice between this card and the Radeon 9800 Pro, the decision should be simple. The Radeon 9800 Pro runs cooler, quieter, only takes up one case slot, runs better in every single benchmark we tested with, and to top it all off, is less expensive as well.

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: oldfart

While this certainly could change in the next few months, the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra market is fairly boring as of today. We're seeing no innovation, nothing to drive the market forward, and considering that full, shipping GeForceFX 5900 Ultra cards perform at lower levels in comparison to the Radeon 9800 Pro in every test we threw at them, it's just impossible for us to recommend the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra. If you have a choice between this card and the Radeon 9800 Pro, the decision should be simple. The Radeon 9800 Pro runs cooler, quieter, only takes up one case slot, runs better in every single benchmark we tested with, and to top it all off, is less expensive as well.

not to mention these benchmarks are NOT the usual q3, ut, etc.. where nvidia cheats with these standard timedemos.

 

[Matt2]

INCOMING!!!!

 

[Corporate Thug]

flame bait or not, the benchies speak for themselves. the 9800 pro whomped on the 5900 ultra

 

[jjyiz28]

hexus did a review where 5900 beats 9800 here
http://www.hexus.net/review.php?review=583

but these are very common benchmarks using standard timedemos where nvidia was caught cheating with. these benchmarks are giving false inflated scores on nvidia's cards.

 

[Schadenfroh]

like i said in the other thread. why did they not use a opengl benchie?

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: stardust
the Geforce FX 5600 ULTRA in that review is Rev1, maybe because the difference between the ULTRA and non-ULTRA is far smaller than the other reviews i've seen on the geforce FX 5600 ULTRA rev2. When ppl claim that the 5600 ultra beats the 9600, they mean Rev2

You sure? I thought they used the same card as in these reviews, a rev2.

It's notable that GamePC benches only with AA+AF on. I'm curious if we'll see cards that default to AA+AF on in the next generation or the one after.

 

[Vonkhan]

i :heart: my 9800pro

 

[HaloEighty8]

I really like gamepc's reviews, they tell it the way it is. This was a excellent review/article as well, personally nvidia lost me after the 5800 ultra fiasco. When I was deciding whether or not to get a 5900 ultra, I went with the 9800 Pro 256M version and I'm truly happy with it. I had the 128M which I was just as happy with! btw, this isn't bait! just my personal comments!

 

[nRollo]

I really like gamepc's reviews, they tell it the way it is.

If that's true, some ATers owe me an apology for saying that I'm "blind" not being able to the "huge" difference in AA image quality, these guys said they can't either!
LOL
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=3x5900u&page=12">I bet this is one part of the review some of you didn't believe</a>

In addition, many users have pointed out that ATI's 4x full-scene anti-aliasing looks visibly better than that of nVidia's. Honestly, during gameplay, we could tell very little difference between the two anti-aliasing methods. Both looked great on our end

Hmmm, not as night and day as some of you would like to think....

 

[TourGuide]

What I am having trouble with is the back and forth of one sites reviews and anothers. HardOCP and even Anands reviews showed this card (the nVidia) in a better light. Then GamePC comes along and it is flipped again.

I can understand if the 9800 is just plain faster, OK. But the results should be consistent. I am having a hard time believing there is this much variation in the benchmarks.

 

[nRollo]

Tourguide:
These benchmarks support the 9800s, which everyone already has, so they are correct. If we were to believe the benchmarks where the 5900 comes out on top, we'd be nVidiots.
Make sense?

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: TourGuide
What I am having trouble with is the back and forth of one sites reviews and anothers. HardOCP and even Anands reviews showed this card (the nVidia) in a better light. Then GamePC comes along and it is flipped again.

I can understand if the 9800 is just plain faster, OK. But the results should be consistent. I am having a hard time believing there is this much variation in the benchmarks.

read my 2nd post again

reason again, is because hardocp & anand are using benchmarks from q3, ut2k3, and other very popular benchmarks. nvidia knows these are the main benchmarks used and therefore used cheats in there drivers to inflate these standard timedemos. if they use custom timedemos, nvidia score would drop. gamepc's benchmarks while still standard demos, nvidia didn't have the foresight to think that anyone would use these games (freelancer, vice city, etc..) as benchmarks, and therefore no cheats were enabled in their drivers to artificially inflate their scores just for these particular benchmarks.

also, hardocp is nvidia's whore so...

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Tourguide:
These benchmarks support the 9800s, which everyone already has, so they are correct. If we were to believe the benchmarks where the 5900 comes out on top, we'd be nVidiots.
Make sense?

if reviewers used custom timedemos for benchmarks, ati will most often come out on top no matter what benchmarks in the past nvidia won at due to using standard demos.

 

[nRollo]

also, hardocp is nvidia's whore so

LOL- the reviews are rigged! nVidia is cheating! They paid off the reviewers!
<shakes head in bemusement>
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Substitute "3dfx" for "ATI" in these "noble underdog can topple Goliath" posts and it's 1999 all over again......

 

[TourGuide]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Tourguide:
These benchmarks support the 9800s, which everyone already has, so they are correct. If we were to believe the benchmarks where the 5900 comes out on top, we'd be nVidiots.
Make sense?

That makes sense to me.

I also understand the application specific cheats. It just doesn't make it any easier to judge the real "winner" between the cards.

 

[Supa]

ATI's .15 micron 9800 Pro beats out Nvidia's .13 micron 5900 Ultra ... wait until ATI's top of the line card move to .13 process (though 9600 Pro is already .13).

---

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Supa
ATI's .15 micron 9800 Pro beats out Nvidia's .13 micron 5900 Ultra ... wait until ATI's top of the line card move to .13 process (though 9600 Pro is already .13).

---

ATI's next high-end card is still 0.15

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: Rollo

also, hardocp is nvidia's whore so

LOL- the reviews are rigged! nVidia is cheating! They paid off the reviewers!
<shakes head in bemusement>
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Substitute "3dfx" for "ATI" in these "noble underdog can topple Goliath" posts and it's 1999 all over again......

seems like you are the one with the wool over your eyes. i also suppose you think futuremark's retraction about nvidia's cheats were really in fact just optomizations.

welcome to the real world

 

[nRollo]

i also suppose you think futuremark's retraction about nvidia's cheats were really in fact just optomizations

A. I've always said I don't care if anyone cheats at 3dmark, and ATI did it too
B. You can skew custom benchmarks also by having what's in them more tailored to one card's strength
C. I think both companies optimize for benchmarks, game of quack anyone?

 

[PLaYaHaTeD]

I just can't understand....I can't even fathom how nVidia takes an extra 8 months to come out with a product that is just on par with ati's cards. On top of that, the cards are at a rediculous price! I don't know how in the world video cards got up to be $500 dollars, but I hope these companies learn you can't charge this much for a video card.

I have my brand new 3.0 ghz comp sitting here without a video card. I have $250 to spend on one, but this price range is absent of any real competition. The only thing that is worthy of my money at this price is a 9800 np and 9700 Pro, but they still want almost 300 dollars for these! And forget about nVidia. Even the 5600 rev 2 is not in the same class as anything from ati >= 9700 np.

FX 5900 Value? Hey maybe it will be competitive, but nVidia wants to milk the $500 dollar market with their overpriced Ultras. That sh*t makes me so mad! This whole f*cking video card situation is pissing me off to no end.

I remember when the GeForce 3's first came out. You had the ti200 for $175 and it was very competitive to the performance of a ti500, which was what, $300? Now you have 5600's for $175 with half the performance of a 5900 for $500. That is garbage. You just arent getting as much for your money anymore.

I'm ranting cause im pissed off. I have a computer here with no video card. I'm not going to pay $500 for a video card. Flame me all you want, i dont care

 

[dirtrat]

When you all will be getting 2 fps more in your favorite games with your 9800 Pro, I'll be happy with my 5900 ultra and having NO compatibility or artifact problems. ATI has some serious driver issues that they need to work out! I'd much rather take a few frames per second hit in speed than deal with driver/compatibilty issues. I'm taking my 9800 Pro back to best buy today for a refund, I've had it with the problems! This is a $400.00 video card and it shouldn't have ANY issues or problems.