chris_uk
Premium Member
Registered: 8th Jul 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra vs. Radeon 9800 XT
Standard
Faster xox
At the same level o
Slower xxoxx
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra vs. Radeon 9800 XT
4xFSAA & 8xAniso
Faster xx
At the same level
Slower xxooxxxox
x means DX8 or below; o means DX9
The GeForce FX 5950 doesn't look to good in this comparison. It does especially bad in 4xFSAA and 8x anisotropic filtering tests.
GeForce FX 5700 Ultra vs. Radeon 9600 XT
Standard
Faster xx
At the same level xxooxx
Slower o
GeForce FX 5700 Ultra vs. Radeon 9600 XT
4xFSAA & 8xAniso
Faster xxo
At the same level xx
Slower xxooxx
x means DX8 or below; o means DX9
In most of the standard tests, the FX 5700 is on par with the Radeon 9600 XT. It too tends to take a performance nosedive when 4xFSAA and 8x anisotropic filtering come into play.
3 things,
1, i dont give a flying fuck what a review says..
2, who the fuck is gunna play in 4xfsaa and 8xaniso
3, i have both these cards and tryed both cards in the same machine on 1 game
star wars galaxies (full detail on everything)
Geforce 4 128mb 48.xx detonator drivers (52.xx are the latest)
2x fsaa (full Screen anti-analising)
2x anisotropic filtering
FPS was at 19fps constant
Radeon 9800 128mb 3.7x catalyst drivers (latest ones) <<not XT version
0x fsaa (full Screen anti-analising)
0x anisotropic filtering
FPS was at 15-16fps
wen i took the 2x fsaa and the 2x anisotropic filtering off i got 30fps constant (this game is only meant to run at 30fps, dunno why)
for those who dont know what FSAA actually means is basically smooths out all jagged edges. and makes them smooth.
p.s i reinstalled XP each time i put in a different card so there was no conflicts wiv the cards drivers.
following this up i will give both cards another go on 3dMark 2001, 2 and 3 so we can see what they get.
[Edited on 14-01-2004 by chris_uk]
[Edited on 14-01-2004 by chris_uk]
|
chris_uk
Premium Member
Registered: 8th Jul 03
User status: Offline
|
ttt
|
Icy
Member
Registered: 31st Jan 01
Location: Edinburgh Drives: Mk3 Golf Gti
User status: Offline
|
think am gona go for a gforce 5700 but which one theyres liek 4 diff ones lol
|
chris_uk
Premium Member
Registered: 8th Jul 03
User status: Offline
|
there are a couple, asus, hercules, gainward, saphire etc etc, i went wiv gainward for my geforce because they make quality m/b's but to be honest the hercules is a good choice,
i personaly would either go for gainward or hercules
|
Icy
Member
Registered: 31st Jan 01
Location: Edinburgh Drives: Mk3 Golf Gti
User status: Offline
|
didnt mean that but on here
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/MSI_nvidia_graphics_cards.html
has bout 4 diff 5700s
with each one specs the same 
|
chris_uk
Premium Member
Registered: 8th Jul 03
User status: Offline
|
you have u2u
|
Adam
Member
Registered: 1st May 01
Location: Hurstbourne Tarrant
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by chris_uk
Radeon 9800 128mb 3.7x catalyst drivers (latest ones) <<not XT version
0x fsaa (full Screen anti-analising)
0x anisotropic filtering
FPS was at 15-16fps
wen i took the 2x fsaa and the 2x anisotropic filtering off i got 30fps constant (this game is only meant to run at 30fps, dunno why)
for those who dont know what FSAA actually means is basically smooths out all jagged edges. and makes them smooth.
p.s i reinstalled XP each time i put in a different card so there was no conflicts wiv the cards drivers.
following this up i will give both cards another go on 3dMark 2001, 2 and 3 so we can see what they get.
[Edited on 14-01-2004 by chris_uk]
[Edited on 14-01-2004 by chris_uk]
My 9700 gets more fps than that, you must have a bit of a shed of a PC
[Edited on 14-01-2004 by Adam]
|
Mav 3000
Member
Registered: 16th Aug 01
Location: Leicestershire
User status: Offline
|
I just bought the Creative Labs FX 5600 XT with 256MB DDR. No complaints - can't handle NFS Underground in top res, but this may be my PC too (AMD 1.6Ghz, 512MB DDR RAM). Cost me just over £100 from Stak.com.
|
