nVidia GF FX 5900 Ultra

[Miasma]

Thank God, nVidia finally made up for some of their mistakes of the 5800, altough that "covering AGP + 1 PCI" slot thing doesn't sound too appealing.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030512/index.html

[Jagermeister]

I don't really mind that it takes up an additional PCI slot, I use only two slots, 1 AGP and 1 PCI. Also, it's not like peeps use all their slots anyway. Bottom line... if it gets the job done, I wouldn't mind if it took up 3 slots.

[Miasma]

Yeah, same with me - I only use one slot.

I also hear its kinda noisy though, but when I put it in my new Alienware this summer, I don't think it should be too bad. :cheese:

[Mr. Redundant]

the only thing apparently unappealing about the 5900 ultra is the price at the moment, Im glad Nvidia has reclaimed their throne, I just wish they woulda done it before I got my ati 9800 lol, not that IM complaining I love my card.

[Axyon]

Let's not mention how the 5900 was made with reduced Image Quality to specifically gain FPS over the 9800, shall we?

[righte0us]

you're kidding ... right? :eek:

[Axyon]

Nope.

[Added]

Not to mention continued evidence like this (http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2003q2/3dmurk03/index.x?pg=6) that shows nVidia is still cheating on Benchmarking tests..

[Digital]

ATI has also cheated in benchmark test you know `?

[Miasma]

They BOTH cheat - I knew this from the beginning. It's just some corporate insider idiots trying to fool everyone into thinking they've just bough the best graphics card.

However, benchmarks have been done that have tricks up their sleeve, so to say.

[Axyon]

Originally posted by Digital
ATI has also cheated in benchmark test you know `?

ATi's cheating wasn't as serious as nVidia's, plus ATi didn't go as low as nVidia did with the whole IQ fiasco.

[Murray_H]

But cheating is cheating :/

[Shockwave]

its been confirmed by futuremark that nvidia has not cheated after reviewing it more...

[Axyon]

What do you call the 3dmark/3dmurk crossover then?

[Vertigo]

Ok, ok...lemme settle this one here...
Futuremark and Nvidia recently had a 'meeting' to settle what the hell was going on. After a long talk, it was settled that they in fact didn't 'cheat', they had optimized their software for 3DMark. Yes, this is basically cheating, but it's basically stating it was no different than what ATi does.

-Vert

[[Matt]]

The fact still remains that the FX 5900 ultra is the faster card! :D

[Vertigo]

Yup...though if it's worth the price or not, that's up to you.

-Vert

[SidewinderX]

and remember Futuremark designed 3Dmark03 around ATIs cards....

[Axyon]

Originally posted by |MaTT|
The fact still remains that the FX 5900 ultra is the faster card! :D

If you enjoy poorer IQ, then sure.

[Vertigo]

Originally posted by Abom|nation
If you enjoy poorer IQ, then sure.
I'll agree with you there...the FX 5900's Anti-Aliasing quality is definitely lower than that of the Radeon's...

-Vert

[Wild_Ragnar]

ATI has also cheated in benchmark test you know `?
ah hell they all cheat, they all want the little gren paper vith somebodys face on.:flame: why dont they just make a g-kard that does what its been made to do(without the cheating):afro:

[Miasma]

why dont they just make a g-kard that does what its been made to do(without the cheating)

Because every company in the IT industry is full of greedy, incompitant, and conceited bastards. :bounce:

As for the new GF card, I'm not too happy about the clock speed being lowered 50mhz, but I like how they heightened the memory bandwidth alot.

Here are the specs for each card, compare them as you wish:

NVIDIA® GeForce FX 5900 Ultra

GPU Speed 450 MHz

Memory Configuration 256 MB 425 MHz DDR

Interface AGP 4x/8x

Graphics Engine NVIDIA CineFX™ 2.0

Fill Rate 3.6 Gigatexels/s

Memory Bandwidth 27.2 GB/Sec

TV-Out Support Yes

Multiple Display Support Yes

RAMDAC Speed Dual 400MHz


ATI® RADEON™ 9800 PRO

VPU Speed 380 MHz

Memory Configuration 128 MB 680 MHz DDR

Interface AGP 4x/8x

Graphics Engine RADEON 9800 PRO

Fill Rate 3.2 Gigapixles/s

Memory Bandwidth 21.8 GB/s

TV-Out Support Yes

Multiple Display Support Yes

RAMDAC Speed 400MHz

Special Features SMARTSHADER™ 2.1, SMOOTHVISION™ 2.1, HYPER Z™ III, TRUFORM™ 2.0, VIDEOSHADER™


Hmm, I still wonder which one will get my money :cheese:

[righte0us]

go for the ATi

[Shad0hawK]

it is always entertaining to watch the ati crowd whine, at work i get to tinker with both cards, and as a computer and computer part seller i have to take a different perpective than most do:

most of my customers are not computer geeks, they want to simply plug things in and have them work right with minimum BS.

that being said, the vast majority of the time i will sell them a nvidia based card. why? you plug it in, install the driver and it works (almost) all the time.

i am hesitant about selling them an ati card because they have givin us the most problems this is not opinion, it is objetive fact. since i have been working at this place(well over a year) we have had to RMA no nvidia based cards, as compared to 3 ATI and ATI based cards.

the last was a radeon 8500 AIW that was sent back because it would not display a video signal, we could hear windows start up, after spending hours tinkering with the card in various ways we called ATI's tech support and they told us our problem was a "known issue". known to them, but not to us because thier website says nothing about it. you see to get a video signal the firwire port had to be disabled.

the customer asked the obvious question "why should i disable features that i paid for to get the card to work?"

we had the obvious answer, we replaced the 8500 AIW with a msi TI4200 with VIVO which booted right into windows properly.
was this an isolated incident? no. we have frequently had to pull ATI cards that did not function properly and replace them with nvidia based cards to satisfy the customer.

[$pazmatazz]

Originally posted by Shad0hawK
i am hesitant about selling them an ati card because they have givin us the most problems this is not opinion, it is objetive fact. since i have been working at this place(well over a year) we have had to RMA no nvidia based cards, as compared to 3 ATI and ATI based cards.

Three ATi cards RMA'ed in one year? That's nothing..

[Shad0hawK]

Three ATi cards RMA'ed in one year? That's nothing..

SH: true, it is not a "huge" amount but it is 3 times as many nvidia based cards that were RMA'ed. ;)

the big issue is people that buy cards that expect to put them in their comp, install the drivers and have them work with no hassle, if they could write a driver that was not broken, i would even perhaps buy one myself :D

i am not an "ATI hater" per se, we have sold many ATI cards that people were very pleased with. however when we sell a card that is difficult to install or has problems, i have to deal with irate people, and i do not like having to to that. i would much rather the next time they come in have them say "that video card you sold me is great!" and so i am more inclined to sell them an nvida card, unless they specifically ask for ATI.

[Axyon]

Originally posted by Shad0hawK
SH: true, it is not a "huge" amount but it is 3 times as many nvidia based cards that were RMA'ed. ;)



Actually, 0 times 3 is 0 :p

[droper]

ANd never had a compatability problem. 8500 series.

I find that most problems have nothing to do with the cards but the motherboards and cheap parts (memory,sound card,etc). Ati makes the best product out there when you measure up all the factors involved. don't blame them for the stupidity of others.

by the way ati has better image quality and support then nvidia. I used to like nvidia but they are becoming victoms of their own success by that i mean they are putting out lousy product to not fall behind. If you call a 2 slot noisy cow an acceptable replacement for a single slot practically the same performance card if not better in many cases fine as long as you know what you are doing.

[SpuD]

Let the nerd wars BEGIN!

[Draklyne]

I like the GeForceFX 5900 Ultra a lot, but ATI's recent forays into .13u territory (Radeon 9600 pro, 153MHz overclock) is forcing me to wait for a .13u high end Radeon. Mmm, tasty overclocking...

Then again, ATI might just clock their highest part upwards a little bit like they did with their radeon 9800 pro. That ticked me off.

I just hope another competitor appears for nVidia and ATI. Nothing drives prices down like competition.

Has anyone heard of the Delta Chrome videocard that was supposed to outdo the radeon 9700 pro, yet cost only 90 dollars? What happened to that?

[Shad0hawK]

Actually, 0 times 3 is 0


SH: that is true, but your little equation is misapplied.

;)

[Shad0hawK]

I find that most problems have nothing to do with the cards but the motherboards and cheap parts (memory,sound card,etc). Ati makes the best product out there when you measure up all the factors involved. don't blame them for the stupidity of others.

SH: that is often times true, but i have to wonder, if a certain motherboard works with most vid cards except one or two, is it really the mobo makers fault? i have "measured all the factors involved" by actually working with a wide assortment of different cards by different makers, and the evidence shows me ATI is NOT "the best out there". and certainly not the most user friendly.

by the way ati has better image quality and support then nvidia. I used to like nvidia but they are becoming victoms of their own success by that i mean they are putting out lousy product to not fall behind. If you call a 2 slot noisy cow an acceptable replacement for a single slot practically the same performance card if not better in many cases fine as long as you know what you are doing

SH: i have found that both ATI and nvidia have excellent support. however in many cases the support is by the card manufacturer, not the chipset maker, nad ATI is not the only ones making cards with ATI chipsets. as far as image quality, your opinion is a bit out of date as the newest nvidia drivers improve image quality. if ATI could actually write a driver that worked i would be much more inclined to use and sell them more.

[SidewinderX]

True, nVidia's latest series of cards (excluding the 5900 class) haven't been as good as Radeon's. But for every series of card in the past, ATi has been second place.

Also, until recently ATi's driver's have been complete crap. I mean total, pathetic, why-would-i-buy-this, crap. Sure they are picking up now, but I have never heard of someone having a problem with an offical released nVidia Driver.

[Axyon]

Originally posted by SidewinderX143
True, nVidia's latest series of cards (excluding the 5900 class) haven't been as good as Radeon's. But for every series of card in the past, ATi has been second place.

Also, until recently ATi's driver's have been complete crap. I mean total, pathetic, why-would-i-buy-this, crap. Sure they are picking up now, but I have never heard of someone having a problem with an offical released nVidia Driver.

Don't be absurd, of course people have had problems with nV drivers. I've had problems with certified nVidia drivers before... the 41.09 set caused a plethora of problems, for example.

But yeah, in general, they have been better than ATi's. The 3.4 Catalysts are solid drivers though.

[Curator]

Nvidia are anything but fool proof. One of their past driver sets caused slowdown and other various problems on one of my pcs. I also have another pc that when used with an nvidia card causes it to go into infinite loops and bsod errors. Works fine with any other card.

[Majestic XII]

For those who like nVIDIA so much:

Have you tried the latest ATI cards (like 9700 and so on)?

Do you have FSAA on when you play? I have 4x FSAA and 16x AF (i dont even think that Geforce have that) and if you have a geforce card you will have to use 6x or 8x FSAA to have the same quality (and you loose speed too).

i can never play without FSAA, its too messy.

[ShinRa]

9800 pro 128 mb, thats my card, i use 8xagp, and take it from me, nvidias got nothing on ati. my friend has the 5900, and we did a test (he brought his comp over for a weekend). we played the exact same games on the exact same servers. besides the fact my game looked better, my overall performance was better. the 5900 pales in comparison to the 9800 pro. no im not an ati fanboy, its just the simple truth, without getting into the nerdy computer card spec war.

[Majestic XII]

Originally posted by guinny
9800 pro 128 mb, thats my card, i use 8xagp, and take it from me, nvidias got nothing on ati. my friend has the 5900, and we did a test (he brought his comp over for a weekend). we played the exact same games on the exact same servers. besides the fact my game looked better, my overall performance was better. the 5900 pales in comparison to the 9800 pro. no im not an ati fanboy, its just the simple truth, without getting into the nerdy computer card spec war.

Yepp, you should take the reviews on the internet with a big truckload of salt (swedish sating...donno if you have the same :))

That means that you should never trust a review 100% until you seen it for your self, so guinny good job :)

[Sat]

Originally posted by guinny
9800 pro 128 mb, thats my card, i use 8xagp, and take it from me, nvidias got nothing on ati. my friend has the 5900, and we did a test (he brought his comp over for a weekend). we played the exact same games on the exact same servers. besides the fact my game looked better, my overall performance was better. the 5900 pales in comparison to the 9800 pro. no im not an ati fanboy, its just the simple truth, without getting into the nerdy computer card spec war.

Does your friend has the same exact CPU, ram amount/type, hd, etc ?
Otherwise your test means nothing..

[ShinRa]

actually he does, we bought and built our comps together and we agreed to get the exact same hardware. we're both running (im not getting into everything, too long)

3.0ghz p4 800FSB
ati radeon 9800 pro 128 and his geforce fx 5900
1024mb PC3200 DDR400 ram

[ShinRa]

Originally posted by Majestic XII
That means that you should never trust a review 100% until you seen it for your self, so guinny good job :)

its not that im favoring ati dont get me wrong, but in this debate im sorry, the 9800 pro owns the 5900 2 to 1

[Majestic XII]

Originally posted by guinny
its not that im favoring ati dont get me wrong, but in this debate im sorry, the 9800 pro owns the 5900 2 to 1

no no, i said that you made a good job, nothing else :)

[A.A]

Originally posted by Majestic XII
Yepp, you should take the reviews on the internet with a big truckload of salt (swedish sating...donno if you have the same :))

That means that you should never trust a review 100% until you seen it for your self, so guinny good job :)



Lastbilsflak? Nu överdriver du väl lite? =P

And he's right. But in some way, we have to trust the tests so we can know what to buy.
I hate the way graphic cards are benchmarked. It's a bad way of meshurement and it's easy to cheating, and that Nvidia has show ous the best.

[Zerox]

Betta' wait for AquaMark 3 then ya'll get some properly benchmarking!

:)

[A.A]

Originally posted by Zerox
Betta' wait for AquaMark 3 then ya'll get some properly benchmarking!

:)


Maybe.

[FatCombine]

When the comp that I ordered arrived to our local custom computer dealer, they ran tests to check if everything was fine before calling us to pick it up and they ran into a few defective 9700 pros. They had to go through 2 NEW ones until they could actually find a working one.. :bonce:

[EVIL]

What kind of brand where the 9700?

[Tee Kyoo Em]

Originally posted by EVIL
What kind of brand where the 9700?

ATI of course. You could have figured that out from the previous posts in this thread. ;)

[ShinRa]

nietzsche, I think he was talking about the manufacturer. There's several dealers of the ATI cards, such as OEM. Or, if it says RETAIL, that's the card from ATI itself.

[Tee Kyoo Em]

Yes i know, i have caught that quite out-of-context. :bonce:

[ShinRa]

Your forgiven.:hmph:

[EVIL]

/me winds himself up in rage
*plop*
/me relaxes and jently walks away

[ShinRa]

Originally posted by EVIL
/me winds himself up in rage
*plop*
/me relaxes and jently walks away

/me recalls evil saying something about reaching 1000 posts constructively

:cheese:

[pinkerton]

has anyone heard about the problems with 3dmark and 5900? thats really, really, shameful. But either way you wont be let down really. 9800 looks better though.

[Miasma]

has anyone heard about the problems with 3dmark and 5900? thats really, really, shameful. But either way you wont be let down really. 9800 looks better though.

I don't know if you are talking about nVidia's cheating or technical problems, but I do know that the Radeon 9800 is currently on par with the GF FX 5900. Personally there is no way one is better than the other, they both have basically the same benchmark turn outs (except the FX is somewhat better at AA at higher resolutions), and I would be happy with either card. :sniper: