• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

6600GT of fx5900?

O

oldmanatdevry

Junior Member
I currently have an Asus fx5900 and I'm starting to see it's performance degrade with the newer games (dud). I've been considering buying an MSI 6600GT, but there have been a lot of conflicting benchmark results. Has anyone else made the jump from the fx5900 to the 6600GT? I at once considered the 6800, but the price is a bit steep for what I can afford for now.
 
For the DX9 games I played, it was a noticeable jump to go from the 5900xt to a 9700 non-pro, which are cards that were mostly on a par in their day.

I played a lot of Battlefield:Vietnam when I switched from the 5900xt to the 9700. When I took FRAPS data from my normal play and set all framerates above 85 (monitor refresh) equal to 85, I found the 9700 non-pro could get the same framerates that the 5900xt could at 1024x768 at 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF or at 1280x960 0xAA 8xAF.

Capping the framerate was important, because the 5900xt would do great on simple stuff and hit like 120+ FPS when the 9700 may still be under 100, but it would really suck in places, dropping the framerate into the TEENS. It made for a horrible experience unless you turned options way down. Capping the framerates more closely tied my benchmarking to my actual gaming experience. It was the very low framerates I was noticing (negatively) and was the reason I went searching for another card.

Here is an example for HL2:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/half-life_15.html

Look at 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF, the 6600GT is like 30% ahead of the 5900, and this is with AA and AF, where the extra bandwidth of the 5900 should be giving it an advantage... AND the 5900 is running in DX8.1 mode because it sucks at DX9.

I guess what I'm saying is the 5900 series simply doesn't cut it for DX9 games, and you should notice a significant difference between it and a 6600GT. I am a firm believer in Average FPS don't tell you everything.
 
Originally posted by: Pete
A 6600GT is literally twice as fast as a 5900 in shader-heavy games. Here's a review comparing a 6600GT to a 5900XT. I'm not sure where you saw a conflicting benchmark result, as the 6600GT spanks the 5900 across the board.

What's interesting is that the 6600GT looks like what the 5800U should have been, in that its specs are so strikingly similar (500/500MHz, "8 pipes," 128-bit memory, ~130M transistors), yet its shader performance is so much better. Well, I find it interesting. 🙂
Click to expand...


NV3x was a 4x2 piper wasnt it?
 
went from a pny5900fx(AGP) to dual msi6600gt 128's PCI-e(SLI'd) I only installed one intially and underclocked my system to about what my old pputer was and it was still nearly twice as fast as the 5900. NOw I have 2 at full speed side by side I can only run the old puter at meduim setting in BFV and get decent play, the new one runs all the settings all the way up and I can't even see a jerk or lag.
 
Actually, I did do a search, but all I was getting was whether or not anyone liked the 6600GT. If you noticed in my original post, I wanted to know if anyone made the jump I'm considering, and if they thought it was worth it. I'm pretty much looking for first hand knowledge. I know that the 6600GT is a good card, just wanted to know if I'm really going to see much of a difference jumping from an fx5900. My 5900 is not an XT, it is a vanilla 5900 before they XT's came out. I would consider overclocking it since it's capable of matching the 5900 Ultra's performance, but I'm not much for overclocking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top