• 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.

FX 5600 Ultra is worse than a 9500 Pro

lifeguard1999

Platinum Member
From THG:

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.

GeForce FX 5600 Ultra - (350/350 MHz); Estimated price: $199 w/o shipping
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro - (275/275 MHz); ; Current price: $189 shipped, and dropping
 
Back
Top