why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

[tyx]

Alright! Its about time for me to get rid of my geforce DDR and get a brand new card. Personally, I was eyeing the 6600GT, however I have no idea when it will be avaliable and the HSI would probably put it out my budget. Now, I'm thinking of getting the 5900XT or 9800pro and flash either to 5950U or XT. Currently, I am leaning towards the 9800pro just because it performs better at 3dmark 05, although I am aware that it is the better performer.


Just wondering why the Geforce cards totally suck at 3dmark05?? It hurts to see a 9500pro :nanahump: the 5900U. Anyway, is it a driver probelm or something that will be solved in the near future or something like that??

Thanks

[Daneel Olivaw]

The shaders used by 3dmark05 are favorable to th Radeons, however, that just means the gap is even more in favor of ATi, but the gap is still there to begin with.

In real world, however way you look at it, a 5900 beats any 9600-9500 (xcept the softmodded 8pipe 9500pro, depending on clocks), but in truth, the 9700-9800 though I don't own any, seem better than 5900. I mean full fledged 8 pipe 256bit 9700-9800.

Though I'm very happy with my 5900. 3Dmark is not a game you know. So purchase keeping price and true performance in mind. When I bought my 5900xt (runs like a 5900U) almost a year ago, no 9800pro was anywhere close in price.

Btw, try to find a 6800LE instead.

[tyx]

Gee... the 6800LE is almost non-existant here in Singapore :(

[ragejg]

...and everywhere else... :(

[Daneel Olivaw]

oops

[Apple]

The shaders used by 3dmark05 are favorable to th Radeons, however, that just means the gap is even more in favor of ATi, but the gap is still there to begin with.


Shaders aren't favorable to the Radeons, it's plain SM2.0.

In real world, however way you look at it, a 5900 beats any 9600-9500

In old (dx8.0) games, yes, in thrue DX9.0 sm2.0 games, no.

Valve had to create a special mixed mode path (DX8.0/9.0) in the coming HL2 specially for the GF FX, because in thrue DX9.0 the cards cannot produce decent framerates. All Radeon300/350 cards fully render DX9.0 in HL2.

Now, I'm thinking of getting the 5900XT or 9800pro and flash either to 5950U or XT.

Without a heartbeat i should go for the 9800pro, in all coming gametitles (which require DX9.0/sm2.0 to see all the eye-candy) it simply kicks FX5900 ass, hard. :)

[msxyz]

1st: Looking at pure shader fillrate numbers, ATi GPUs are roughly 2x faster than equivalent NVidia GPUs. High-end NV30,35 are 4 pipelines architectures, while mainstream NV31,34,36 are only 2 pipelines architectures (forget the ability to pull out 4 pixels in certain situations): that is half of their ATi counterparts. No surprise if in shader intensive apps their performance sink.

2nd: There's a noticeable speed hit when using more than 2 (4 in FP16) temp registers. I wonder why NVidia overlooked this point in the NV3x architecture, considering that in shader model 1.4/2.0 texture registers cannot be used to hold temp information like in PS 1.1

Although the whole picture for NV3x doesn't look good, it seems that shader model 2.a gives some nice speed boosts over plain 2.0 in 3DMark05 and, hopefully, in games too. NV3x users should be grateful to ATi for making their new R4xx line of cards PS 2.b only. This gives the developers some incentive to include in their games support for PS 2.a/b too.

[Lezmaka]

Alright! Its about time for me to get rid of my geforce DDR and get a brand new card. Personally, I was eyeing the 6600GT, however I have no idea when it will be avaliable and the HSI would probably put it out my budget. Now, I'm thinking of getting the 5900XT or 9800pro and flash either to 5950U or XT. Currently, I am leaning towards the 9800pro just because it performs better at 3dmark 05, although I am aware that it is the better performer.


Just wondering why the Geforce cards totally suck at 3dmark05?? It hurts to see a 9500pro :nanahump: the 5900U. Anyway, is it a driver probelm or something that will be solved in the near future or something like that??

Nope, since it's an architectural/design problem it's pretty hard to fix it via drivers. If you want something now, go with the 9800 Pro. But if you'd prefer the 6600GT and can wait a couple months, the AGP version should be out. Also, why would you need to worry about the HSI? That's something the card manufacturer and Nvidia deal with, not the end user like you. It may add a few dollars to the price of the card, but it shouldn't be outrageous.

[WarheadMM]

3dmark05 measures VERTEX shaders speed. ATi cards are good in vertex shaders and hence why they get a higher score. Also there is ALOT PS 2.0, 2_a shaders in it. And we all know that the FX's are slow when it comes to PS 2.0 2_A shaders

[tristancarton]

Gee... the 6800LE is almost non-existant here in Singapore :(

any chance you could save an extra 60-70 (american) dollars and grab the regular 6800. i feel it is more future proof(if there is such a thing) than the 9800 pro

also 6600gt agp will be out soon(hopefully in stores by december 1st, my guess)

[ChrisRay]

3dmark05 measures VERTEX shaders speed. ATi cards are good in vertex shaders and hence why they get a higher score. Also there is ALOT PS 2.0, 2_a shaders in it. And we all know that the FX's are slow when it comes to PS 2.0 2_A shaders


3dmark also is pixel shader limited. But geometry plays a huge role in 3dmark's performance too.

http://members.cox.net/omega1979/nvnews/vertex.png


That being said, 3dmark05 Is pixel shader bound too. But its just as much vertex limited as it is pixel limited.


ALso I'd like to point out. FX cards are at their fastest when running a Shader 2.0A profile. verses a standard 2.0 path. 2.0A compiled path is optimal for the FX series.

[tyx]

also 6600gt agp will be out soon(hopefully in stores by december 1st, my guess)

hopefully

[saturnotaku]

ALso I'd like to point out. FX cards are at their fastest when running a Shader 2.0A profile. verses a standard 2.0 path. 2.0A compiled path is optimal for the FX series.

Because the shaders for this path are written in the specific order that the GeForce FX likes. And when this is the case, it will outperform the 9800 Pro because of the FX' clock speed advantage. But in the majority of cases, the shaders are not written this way. I don't remember if it was Maximum PC or PC Gamer who did it, but one of them did a big story about how the GeForce FX shader architecture works. It explained everything very clearly to when I was finished reading it I said, "Oh yeah, that makes sense." I'll see if I can dig it up.

[ChrisRay]

Because the shaders for this path are written in the specific order that the GeForce FX likes. And when this is the case, it will outperform the 9800 Pro because of the FX' clock speed advantage. But in the majority of cases, the shaders are not written this way. I don't remember if it was Maximum PC or PC Gamer who did it, but one of them did a big story about how the GeForce FX shader architecture works. It explained everything very clearly to when I was finished reading it I said, "Oh yeah, that makes sense." I'll see if I can dig it up.

Thats regarding register reduction, Instruction ordering is vital, But I wasnt disagreeing or questioning. I was simply pointing out the person that said SM 2.0A profile wasnt optimal for the Nv3x. When it obviously is.

[saturnotaku]

Thats regarding register reduction, Instruction ordering is vital, But I wasnt disagreeing or questioning. I was simply pointing out the person that said SM 2.0A profile wasnt optimal for the Nv3x. When it obviously is.

Oh I know. I was just trying to supplement what you said. I completely agreed with you, and I'm sorry if it didn't come out as such. :)

[Zoolook]

Well this is my 1st ever post here.

I love my 5900u. Yeah it sucks at 3dmark05 but in real life as people have said, it stomps all over any 9500pro. If you're going to upgrade from a Geforce DDR I very strongly recommend a 6600GT, which will kill all of the 9xxx range and any FX range in almost every game/application/benchmark.

Let us know what you do.

[Sworkhard]

Well this is my 1st ever post here.

I love my 5900u. Yeah it sucks at 3dmark05 but in real life as people have said, it stomps all over any 9500pro. If you're going to upgrade from a Geforce DDR I very strongly recommend a 6600GT, which will kill all of the 9xxx range and any FX range in almost every game/application/benchmark.

Let us know what you do.

Not true. It stomps all over the 9600/pro/xt and the 9500 non-pro but the 9500 pro is at least equally matched, and is often faster, due to its 8 pixel pipes @ 275.
9500 pro @ stock (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=108627)
5900xt @ stock (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=185341)

While those numbers are for 3dmark 05, I know that is true in farcry as well. I had a 9600 (which is slower than the 9500 pro) and it ran far cry better than my 5900xt does with fp16 ps2.0 enabled. PS2.0 shaders run better on the 9500pro. As for the upgrade path, I would agree that the 6600gt is the best way to go. Otherwise, a Radeon 9700pro + would be best.

[Daneel Olivaw]

This subject has been dissected over and over again, FX series vs Ati 9xxx, and has been the subject of much flaming. The 9500pro was a perfect card, but the goal of this thread is for a member to find a card to buy. I don't see anyone selling 9500pro anywhere, do you? As of now, the closest card currently sold is the 9800pro, which is a great buy imo.

btw, wasnt the 9500pro 8pipe a softmod?

[Fahim]

Naah, 9500 PRO 8 Pipe is not a softmod.

[Sworkhard]

This subject has been dissected over and over again, FX series vs Ati 9xxx, and has been the subject of much flaming. The 9500pro was a perfect card, but the goal of this thread is for a member to find a card to buy. I don't see anyone selling 9500pro anywhere, do you? As of now, the closest card currently sold is the 9800pro, which is a great buy imo.

btw, wasnt the 9500pro 8pipe a softmod?

You'll notice I gave my suggestion on which card to buy as well as disputing statement I quoted. My goal was not to take the thread off topic. Sorry if I did.

[Daneel Olivaw]

Sworkhard, I didn't mean to sound like a jackass, but I did. I'm sorry, and you didn't take the thread off topic, I think I did... Btw, I was confused, since the 9500 pro had 8 pipe with 128bit bus but could be modded to 256 bit bus. I also think some 9500np 4 pipe could be modded to 8 pipes.

I vote for a cheap 9800pro, a 6800le or nu. Not the 6600, since its not available and can't really be modded.

[Sworkhard]

Daneel Olivaw:
I thought you were being sarcastic but forgot the smilies in your first reply. No offence taken. Also, it was the early model 9500 non-pro cards that could be softmodded to 8pipes/256bus. :) No use getting people misinformed.

Back on topic:
I vote for the 9800pro/6800le/6600GT with the last two being the hardest to find.

[zakelwe]

3dmark also is pixel shader limited. But geometry plays a huge role in 3dmark's performance too.

http://members.cox.net/omega1979/nvnews/vertex.png


That being said, 3dmark05 Is pixel shader bound too. But its just as much vertex limited as it is pixel limited.




In theory yes but not in practice. In practice you will always get a minimum or 4 times as many pxel pipelines as vertex units in the next card up ( or down ) so you should concentrate on the number of pipelines and pixel shading eprformance when it comes to 3dmark05. ie 400 points rather than 100 in the table.

Regards

Andy

[ChrisRay]

In theory yes but not in practice. In practice you will always get a minimum or 4 times as many pxel pipelines as vertex units in the next card up ( or down ) so you should concentrate on the number of pipelines and pixel shading eprformance when it comes to 3dmark05. ie 400 points rather than 100 in the table.

Regards

Andy


Eh? Not even sure what your saying. Yes its both pixel shaded and vertex limited. But vertex performance plays a substancial Roll in overall performance as well.

Surely Pixel performance is important in 3dmark. But so its Vertex performance.

[WarheadMM]

yes PS 2_0A works better on FX cards but there is no games out that uses it. Farcry 1.3 will let you use it tho