PDA

View Full Version : 5900 v 4800 question ?


firthy
12-17-03, 09:47 AM
I presently have a Creative Ti4800 running at 310/700 with no problems but I had the chance to sell this to a friend for 100.

So I bought what was supposedly an FX5900 Ultra, turned out to be the slowest of FX5900's with 400 mhz core and 700 mhz memory. Tried overclocking the card and core will reach 425 before benchmarks get slower, the memory will not overclock at all, even if you set it to 710 mhz the benchmark scores are lower. I am usind 3DMark 2001se. What other benchmarks can I use to see if clocking the memory reduces performance.

Anyway, I phoned the seller and complained and he agreed to let me have it for 120 , so it has only cost me 20 to upgrade, is this card worth keeping over the 4800 for 20 even with the slower memory.

Regards,

Firthy

MUYA
12-17-03, 09:59 AM
erm u got a good deal me thinks

5900SE/XT's are USD$189-200...which is a bit higher than 120? dunno but sounds allright and the XT/SE's are good cards :D read the reviews!!

MUYA
12-17-03, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by firthy

Anyway, I phoned the seller and complained and he agreed to let me have it for 120 , so it has only cost me 20 to upgrade, is this card worth keeping over the 4800 for 20 even with the slower memory.

Regards,

Firthy

I forgot to mention even though the memory is slower than the 4800. the memory interface is 256 bit compared to the 128 bit one found in the 4800. So what that means is that is has more memory bandwidth, and bandwidth is king for MS AA ! If you want to play with AA on that is ;)

Gator
12-17-03, 10:51 AM
ya dont worry about the speed of the memory, an FX5900 > TI4800

you're fine. If you want more proof then benchmark the card, and try some real world games with the AA/AF turned it, it should be ocnsiderably better than the TI4800

firthy
12-17-03, 11:45 AM
Sounds like a good deal then. I was just a bit disappointed at first when I found out that it wasn't the card it was supposed to be but I've saved myself some cash for now anyway.

Downloading Aquamark 3, 3DMark 2003, Codecreatures, SPECviewperf711 and Vulpine GLMark. Are these good benchmarks for this card.

Also heard that Gunmetal is a good benchmark, is this a standalone benchmark or do you need the game to run it.

I've read somewhere in a review that when they overclocked the memory the score on 3DMark 2001se was worse but all of the others improved so I hope that's the case here.

Might post another thread and ask about this.

Thanks for your replies,

Regards,

Firthy

MUYA
12-17-03, 12:09 PM
Mate forget about the benchmarks... :D Just do some gaming with it and compare it with your gaming experience from ti4800

You should find its better to play with in high res and with AA and AF on :D

saturnotaku
12-17-03, 12:20 PM
Seriously man, screw the benchmarks. The 5900 will smoke a GF4 Ti in games especially with AA and AF enabled. Plus you won't be dealing with the Direct3D anisotropic filtering problem that plagued the NV25 line. For what you're paying for that 5900 you got a great deal. Enjoy it. :cool:

cthellis
12-17-03, 01:43 PM
AA + AF + DX9 > the possibility of a few more frames at lower resolutions in Quake 3. :p

Line01
12-17-03, 02:41 PM
FX 5900's are the best cards for the money. Thats it. Look at the real bench marks the games. The latest reviews with the new drivers so this cards holding their on against all the high end cards. There are within 10%
to 15% of all the high end cards.

firthy
12-17-03, 06:44 PM
Well, I downloaded some benchmark programmes and now have my card running stable at 425/735.

I managed 5417 on 3Dmark 2003 with the patch installed, which seems pretty reasonable for a 2800+ with this card so it looks like it wasn't a bad buy for 120.

Regards,

Firthy