Daytona GeForce FX5200 Ultra Review Page 2 of 5
By Jonathan Martini - September 18, 2003
I had the option of benchmarking the
card in two different systems, a 2.4Ghz P4 or 1600+ Athlon XP-based system. I
opted to do the majority of the testing on the P4 platform as I wanted to see
the true potential of the card without having the CPU much of a limiting factor.
However, since most of the potential owners of such a card will not be using a
fairly high-end system, I also felt it was necessary to see how the card
performed in a relatively lower powered system. As such, Iíve added a few Athlon
XP-based benchmarks at the end of the performance section. While Iíll be including performance
results from some fairly common benchmark applications, I also felt it was
necessary to test the card under a variety of typically non-benchmarked games. (Heh,
well at least my time spent playing the various games and demos didnít go
totally wasted. :)
What has become almost commonplace here at nV News is the use of Fraps to
measure the performance of the card under various games. While the results can
never be a true apples-to-apples comparison, the results can give you an idea of
what to expect from the card in terms of real-world performance given the
dynamic and unscripted nature of gaming.
128MB DDR Memory
256-bit Graphics Core
128-bit DDR Memory Interface
10.4 GB/sec. Memory Bandwidth
1.3 Billion Texels/sec Fill Rate
81 Million Vertices/sec.
650MHz Memory Data Rate
325MHz Core Frequency
NVIDIA CineFX Engine
NVIDIA nView Multi-Display Technology
128-Bit Studio Precision Color
Digital Vibrance Control 3.0
Supports Microsoft DirectX 9.0
Intergrated TV Encoder
Hardware MPEG-2 Support
The following is a list of my system specifications along with the games
Intel Pentium4-C 2.4 GHz
Chaintech 9CJS Intel i875P chipset
Kingston HyperX PC3500 - (2) 512MB DIMMs - 1GB Total in Dual Channel
Maxtor 60GB 7200RPM
Palit Daytona GeForce FX 5200 Ultra @ 325MHz/650MHz
NVIDIA Detonator 2000/XP WHQL Version 44.03 and 45.25
Results were generated using HardOCP's excellent
Utility V2.1. The
program test a total of seven maps, I elected to post the performance results of
the most often played and compared maps.
Performance in the CPU-intensive Unreal Tournament was surprisingly high and
consistent at 1024x768 with High Quality settings across all the maps tested.
This is ideally what you're searching for when playing as you don't want to be
changing the display settings as often as the map is change don the server. 2X
FSAA performance is playable at 800x600, once again with high quality settings,
thus allowing the user choice of their display preferences.
The performance delta between the two drivers is barely noticeable under most
situations but there is quite a difference in the dm-phobos map, where the 45.25
Detonators outperformed the 44.03 Detonators by as much as 10 FPS at 1024x768.