PDA

View Full Version : Quick Question fx 5700 as fast as fx 5900?


Pages : [1] 2

Mike360000
10-19-03, 09:48 PM
Title says it all, do you think the fx 5700 will be as fast as the fx 5900?
I want 1 or the other of the above, but I want the 1 that will offer me the most overall. This is not necessarily in relation to price because I can get a new eVGA 5900 for about 225 bux. BTW I know it said the 5700 oc'ed well, but what about the 5900 how does it oc so far? I noticed the eVGA had 2.2 ns ram so that should be good for the memory end, right?

Cheers,
Mike

particleman
10-19-03, 09:50 PM
No the 5700 is not as fast as a 5900. The 5700 edges out the 9600XT (according to hexus.net anyways), but they are both mid range cards. The 5900 is much faster.

Mike360000
10-19-03, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by particleman
No the 5700 is not as fast as a 5900. The 5700 edges out the 9600XT (according to hexus.net anyways), but they are both mid range cards. The 5900 is much faster.

Yeah I thought the 5900 was supposed to have been the faster card.
I had read the Hexus review also and the 1 thing that struck me from it and from reading in general, was how much the 5700 oc'ed. Even in the Hexus review the 9600XT oc'ed really well. So that got me to thinking if the 5700 was oc'ing up to 5900 levels? And if it did would that equal the performance out bewtween oc'ing alone, between the 5700 and 5900.
With that said I was also wondering how much oc'ing room the 5900 eVGA would have, which should pull it even further ahead of the 5700.

Thanks,
Mike

Geforce4ti4200
10-19-03, 10:03 PM
whats the clocks for the fx5700? 475/900? has the core been fixed to enhance shader performance?

Mike360000
10-19-03, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Geforce4ti4200
whats the clocks for the fx5700? 475/900? has the core been fixed to enhance shader performance?

Well that's one thing I'm wondering about.
The 5900 I am looking at only has a core clock of 400 mhz.
From what I am reading, both the 9600XT and the 5700 were both oc'ing their cores to almost 600 mhz! So it makes me wonder if there is some other design differences between the 5700 and 5900?

Cheers,
Mike

bkswaney
10-19-03, 10:43 PM
The 5700 is a 128bit memory bus is it not?

That is the real hand cap.

simwiz2
10-20-03, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Mike360000
Well that's one thing I'm wondering about.
The 5900 I am looking at only has a core clock of 400 mhz.
From what I am reading, both the 9600XT and the 5700 were both oc'ing their cores to almost 600 mhz! So it makes me wonder if there is some other design differences between the 5700 and 5900?

Cheers,
Mike

The midrange GPU's only have fewer pipelines and fewer transistors, so they produce less heat and can clock higher. 9600xt is also using low-k, and IIRC the 5700 is manufactured by IBM, which should be an improvement over the 5900 for clockspeed.

Mike360000
10-20-03, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by simwiz2
The midrange GPU's only have fewer pipelines and fewer transistors, so they produce less heat and can clock higher. 9600xt is also using low-k, and IIRC the 5700 is manufactured by IBM, which should be an improvement over the 5900 for clockspeed.


Thanks,
Anyhow I guess it a mute point now because I went ahead and ordered a eVGA 5900 from Newegg. I thought the price right at 229 bux, especially in light of the fact that Ati has screwed themselves with their cat 3.8 drivers. I can't see the 5900s going much lower than 229 bux because the 5700s will have MSRP of 199 bux and the 5900s would have to sell above that. And I wouldn't be surprised to see some migration back over to the nvidia camp because of the cat 3.8 goofup. Finally if the DX9 performance has really improved with the fx line, then that is all the more reason that prices for the fx may have bottomed out. I think we would see the fx 5950U on the high end at 499. The fx 5900U at 399. And the 5900 at 299. (Give or take a few bucks depending on manufacturer.) So to me the 229 bux for an eVGA seemed right for the times.

Cheers,
Mike

Rogozhin
10-20-03, 04:12 PM
especially in light of the fact that Ati has screwed themselves with their cat 3.8 drivers

If you believe invalid claims.


but $230 is a good price for a 5900nonu

rogo

The Baron
10-20-03, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by Rogozhin
especially in light of the fact that Ati has screwed themselves with their cat 3.8 drivers

If you believe invalid claims.
the flickering issue on 5900 cards was denied for a long time as well...

Mike360000
10-20-03, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Rogozhin
especially in light of the fact that Ati has screwed themselves with their cat 3.8 drivers

If you believe invalid claims.


but $230 is a good price for a 5900nonu

rogo

Hardly invalid:
Look at the links to different forum threads concerning it here:
http://overclockers.com/tips00479/

Way too much evidence for all of it to be invalid.
I liked the Ati v cards, good hardware, but I've been left hanging way too many times with poor driver and tech support. Maybe one day Ati will get it all together and then I'll get another Ati v card. Untill then there isn't much disputing the fact that nvidia has better driver and tech support.

Mike

Mike360000
10-20-03, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by The Baron
the flickering issue on 5900 cards was denied for a long time as well...

Not completely denied, but rather shrugged off.
I agree there was definitely a problem but the problem wasn't blowing up moniters! And nvidia got the problem fixed.....

Mike

sxotty
10-20-03, 04:59 PM
The ATI problem? The monitor one is most likely complete bogus, the running hotter in shader intensive applications I would believe.

Mike360000
10-20-03, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by sxotty
The ATI problem? The monitor one is most likely complete bogus, the running hotter in shader intensive applications I would believe.

I dunno whether it's all bogus or not, but I tend to agree there is some kind of problem. It would be riduculas to not believe there is a problem! But the posts also referred to the gpus burning up.
I'll say again, read the links, all of them that I listed in the link I gave.

Mike

The Baron
10-20-03, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by Mike360000
Not completely denied, but rather shrugged off.
I agree there was definitely a problem but the problem wasn't blowing up moniters! And nvidia got the problem fixed.....

Mike
Trust me. Originally, it was denied. Then, the number of people reporting it grew significantly, and they couldn't ignore it anymore. It wouldn't surprise me if the monitor thing turned out to be the same deal, albeit on a much smaller scale (if it happened to the number of people that the flicker problem happened to, no one would ever buy an ATI card again).

But this is all off topic.

Mike360000
10-20-03, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by The Baron
Trust me. Originally, it was denied. Then, the number of people reporting it grew significantly, and they couldn't ignore it anymore. It wouldn't surprise me if the monitor thing turned out to be the same deal, albeit on a much smaller scale (if it happened to the number of people that the flicker problem happened to, no one would ever buy an ATI card again).

But this is all off topic.

Well both makers has their problems. I don't consider myself completely loyal to any v card maker, but I've definitely been soured to Ati v cards by past experences. As I said in another thread somewhere, in a couple of years if Ati can show me to my satisfaction, that their driver and tech support has really immensely improved, I'd then consider another Ati v card.

Mike

bkswaney
10-20-03, 06:37 PM
Well, I'm using a older KDS 19sn and have had no problems at all with the 3.8's.

I've even used the Dell drivers. No problems to reports at all. :)
The ones reporting it only had 1 post and joined the forums the same day.

I smell something fishy and it's not fish. ;)

Mike360000
10-20-03, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by bkswaney
Well, I'm using a older KDS 19sn and have had no problems at all with the 3.8's.

I've even used the Dell drivers. No problems to reports at all. :)
The ones reporting it only had 1 post and joined the forums the same day.

I smell something fishy and it's not fish. ;)

Not every moniter or 9800 was affected.
Read the articles and know why.
That could very well be the reason you was unaffected.

Mike

simwiz2
10-20-03, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by bkswaney
The ones reporting it only had 1 post and joined the forums the same day.

Of course, it all makes sense now. It must be a huge nVidia conspiracy! :rolleyes: :D

Mike360000
10-20-03, 11:16 PM
Just to be fair here is Ati's response to the problems.
I just found this.

http://www.driverheaven.net/#article_7385

Mike

ChrisRay
10-21-03, 10:39 AM
All I know. Is my Monitor has not experienced any such issues *shrug*

particleman
10-21-03, 02:23 PM
I had no such problems installing CAT 3.8 as well. No monitor issues, and no heat issues. I believe someone on driver heaven did a thorough test with a heat probe and he actually found CAT 3.8 to run a very small amount cooler than CAT 3.7 (within the margin of error of course). I don't see how a driver can significantly boost temperatures unless it ups voltages (which it can't, if it were so easy we wouldn't see ppl doing hardware volt mods) or overclocking the card.

goofer456
10-21-03, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Mike360000
Well both makers has their problems. I don't consider myself completely loyal to any v card maker, but I've definitely been soured to Ati v cards by past experences. As I said in another thread somewhere, in a couple of years if Ati can show me to my satisfaction, that their driver and tech support has really immensely improved, I'd then consider another Ati v card.

Mike

Care to share some real facts?

Mike360000
10-21-03, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by goofer456
Care to share some real facts?

What an insult!
I don't need *YOUR* real facts to justify what I want and decide for myself!
Geez how arrogant!

The Baron
10-21-03, 05:18 PM
Don't push me, kids. And goofer, if I had not been heavily into 3D stuff over the past two years or so and I had used an original Radeon, there's no way in hell I would ever buy a Radeon ever again.