PDA

View Full Version : story: tried a GFFX 5600 128DDR


Gator
07-11-03, 11:08 PM
So I built an econo PC for a friend with a VERY similar configuration to mine. AXP1800, ECS K7S5A Pro mobo, 512 Crucial DDR2100, WinXP Pro... but the big difference is I'm using a GF4 TI4400 128DDR and he is using a GFFX 5600 128DDR (non-ultra). Although I warned him GFFX might be slower in some things, he wanted to be prepared for DX9 games just in case and the GFFX came with a bunch of nifty accessories so I said "ok whatever you want."

I finish the PC tonight and all the software, and thought "why not try 3dmark2k1 just for the heck of it, I'll uninstall when I'm done." WOH! Aside from the fact it studdered quite a bit where my GF4 doesnt at all, his score was about 7700!!! That's pathetic, my year-old GF4 gets 10214. Hell even my old R8500 got in the 9000 range and it's suppose to compete with GF3TI.

Conclusion? Either something is wrong or the GFFX5600 really IS that bad in comparison to a GF4 (and possible GF3)! WOW!

Geforce4ti4200
07-11-03, 11:20 PM
you cant expect miracles on a stock fx5600 and a slow xp1800 cpu dude.........he needs a high fsb and oc the card and then he will break 10k easy. It is a bit slower than a ti4200, perhaps equal to a ti500 but that does not matter, a fast cpu more than makes up for a midrange card........

Gator
07-11-03, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
you cant expect miracles on a stock fx5600 and a slow xp1800 cpu dude.........he needs a high fsb and oc the card and then he will break 10k easy. It is a bit slower than a ti4200, perhaps equal to a ti500 but that does not matter, a fast cpu more than makes up for a midrange card........

ummm... errrr... but wouldnt the TI4400 see just as much of a jump if you raise the FSB and overclock and such... lol ;)

Rogozhin
07-11-03, 11:34 PM
Also, the 5600 is aimed at the budget market and therefore most people that purchase these cards WON'T be running ultra high end machines, so your logic is flawed on more than two levels-bah.

rogo

Gator
07-11-03, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Rogozhin
Also, the 5600 is aimed at the budget market and therefore most people that purchase these cards WON'T be running ultra high end machines, so your logic is flawed on more than two levels-bah.

rogo

right... but lets not go defending GFFX here and just think simple and logical for a monent

1) GFFX is newer than GF4TI, and the GFFX 5600 is suppose to compete with the TI4200 (only a notch below the TI4400) so it should be higher than 7700

2) TI4400 runs at 275/550 and GFFX5600 runs at 325/550. Even with my OCed TI4400 the GFFX5600 still has a faster core so shouldnt it be higher than 7700

3) almost the same exact machine as my own, in fact I only have an AXP1700 and my friend has an AXP1800, so wouldnt it be safe to say the GFFX5600 simply falls about 25% behind the GF4TI?


;)

Geforce4ti4200
07-11-03, 11:47 PM
the ti500 is clocked higher than a ti4200, yet the ti4200 eats the ti500 by like 10% in games and in 3dmark, for some reason its even greater a difference. I guess the fx5600 behaives alot like a ti500 with DX 9, slower in 3dmark, almost as fast in games. also he needs to raise his fsb dude......games need a fast cpu badly!


edit: gator's score of 10200 sucks cause hes running 66MHz fsb...eeeeeeeewwwwww!!!!!!!!!!

Gator
07-11-03, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
...also he needs to raise his fsb dude......games need a fast cpu badly!

that's fine... except his CPU chip is faster than mine and I'm running circles around him with an older and lower clocked GPU as well... see my point?

DSC
07-11-03, 11:51 PM
IIRC, Ti500 is 240/250(500Mhz) while the Ti4200 is 250/250(500MHz) for the 64MB and 250/222(444MHz) for the 128MB models.

The thing is, the Ti500 costs $300+ when it came out, while the Ti4200s costs around $199 and throughly spanked the much more expensive Ti500s in almost all games...... :D

Geforce4ti4200
07-11-03, 11:59 PM
can you link me to his published score of 7700 or whatever he has? also the ti500 was never more expensive than a ti4200, also the ti4200s came after the ti500 and this made the ti500 drop to about 90% the price of what a ti4200 cost. I think the ti4200s were $180-200 when they came out and the ti500s were around $150 and the ti200s like $99

Gator
07-12-03, 12:04 AM
like I said, I only installed 3dmark to run the test once, and then uninstalled it since I knew he wouldnt use it... sorry :(. I do know I used for the GFFX the standard settings at 1024x768@32bit color if that helps, and the CPU was at 133fsb, standard memory timing for Crucial DDR2100 2.5cas (same as my timings)