GeForceFX owners thread

[jAkUp]

that score doesnt seem low. 3dmark 2k3 is mainly a video card benchie, and you score about 300 more points than me

[bkswaney]

Originally posted by Zimm
First off, I want mail!! Nice can of worms you opened there :)

Second, I just bought a new system (wanted the warrenty) specs are:

P4 2.8ghz
ASUS MB (Don't have the model in front of me)
512 DDR
eVGA GforceFX 5800 Ultra
Western Digital 80G Ultra HD
400 watt case
3Dmark 03 score 5864


Now when playing my games I of course have no problems except for AC2, but I think it's their code rather then my card. But my system seems choppy after playing my games, and honesly I think my 03 score is low for this system, any thoughts?

Your score seems good to me. :)
Choppy?

[Zimm]

Thank you for the replies, I am a newbie to this whole 03 score, but when comparing online it looking like there were a lot slower machines wooping me! But I will take your word for it and not worry about it.

What I ment by choppy is that when I leave a game, when you move the mouse it jutters across the screen, and there is lag when running any windows apps, but....

I think this is also associated to AC2 and I just didn't realize it, it appears AC2 has a memory leak....

Anywho thanks for the response!!

[SurfMonkey]

Can somebody run 3DMark03 with their FX5800 running at 300\600? Just want to get a ball park figure.

[threedaysdwn]

Zimm, how well does AC2 run on the FX?

I have a Radeon 9700 Pro and it's driving me crazy.


Some of my biggest gripes are the problems in AC2... specifically, Pixel Shaders cause all sorts of visual artifacts that get worse over time. Shadows cause horrible lagging.
And the cat 3.3 betas crash after about 30 seconds in game (3.2s crash less often, and 3.0s the least.... funny how that works).

I'm considering the move to a 5800U if I can find one, after reading of BK's satisfaction with the card.

So what problems have you had with AC2? It *is* a system resource hog... but I'm okay with that :)
No memory leaks in the game (any more) as far as I can tell.

[Rampant CL]

Hey guys, i have a bit of a problem.

I just bought an MSI FX 5800, new mobo and ram, and installed it all yesterday.

The only problem is anytime i try to run a 3d app or game it begins as normal and then freezes the system. If i press any key it just reboots the system. I think it could be because i ahve a 300W PSU, but until i can replace it tonight i would appreciate any ideas you may have.

[Kain]

Originally posted by Rampant CL
Hey guys, i have a bit of a problem.

I just bought an MSI FX 5800, new mobo and ram, and installed it all yesterday.

The only problem is anytime i try to run a 3d app or game it begins as normal and then freezes the system. If i press any key it just reboots the system. I think it could be because i ahve a 300W PSU, but until i can replace it tonight i would appreciate any ideas you may have. Check your VIO voltage. Make sure it is set at 3.4v or above.

[quik_2_win]

I've been toying with my PNY FX 5800 Ultra for about three weeks now, and have been generally impressed with the card. As we all know- the hardware itself is extremely high quality. I'm not really thrilled with the current 43.45 driver, however. Hopefully 'N' will release an improved version soon-

[Rampant CL]

Where could i change the VIO voltage in the bios, i havethe GA-7VAXP-A Ultra and i cannot recall seeing that anywhere.

An update tho,

I tried it with a 400W PSU, no difference.

I redid DX 9, mobo drivers, graphics and suddenly it started working fine on 4x.

On 8x however, there is massive flickering on screen, artificing, distortions, partial rendering on models, invisible parts of models, etc. Make anything of this news?

[ricercar]

Originally posted by SurfMonkey
Can somebody run 3DMark03 with their FX5800 running at 300\600?

PNY GeForce FX 5800 Ultra @ 300/600
3DMark03 = 5,949
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=542319

I'm trying to tweak for that magical 6,000, but my best attempts are resisted so far.

[saturnotaku]

Now that I have my Gainward FX 5800 Ultra up and running, I thought I'd give some of my initial thoughts on this card. I bought the FX because it's an anomaly and something that not everyone will have the opportunity to own.

Having gone from an R300-based card to this, I think I can make some good comparisons.

Let's start with 2D/Desktop quality. The FX is brighter than any NVIDIA card I've previously owned (TNT, GF2 MX, GF2 Ultra, GF3, GF4 Ti4600). As a matter of fact, I had to turn down the brightness of my monitor. That, plus a small bump of the digital vibrance slider has my desktop looking better than it did with my Radeon. 2D clarity for text is about the same from both cards.

3D image quality - using the 43.51 drivers, the control panel defaults to Quality. I tested games using all three methods and anything other than the Quality setting looks like a$$, plain and simple. Textures on performance and balanced look horrid. But using Quality, IQ is quite good. 4xAA and 8xAF on the FX in Quake 3 with Trilinear filtering looks about the same as 4xAA and 8x quality AF on the Radeon. Same deal with UT2003. Image quality is excellent on both cards, and differences are imperceptible to me.

3D performance - The 128-bit bus of the NV30 is a handicap when compared to my Radeon. In the course of playing UT2003 on my Radeon, my framerates were higher overall, using 1280x1024 w/4xAA and 8x performance aniso. On a side note, though, S3TC/OpenGL in the original Unreal Tournament works on the FX, unlike on the Radeon. The Radeon would give me flashing textures and other anomalies that the FX does not exhibit. It did work fine in Direct3D, though. But with OpenGL on the FX, I'm averaging a steady 100 fps at 1280x1024 with 4xAA and 8x aniso so that makes me happy.

Loudness - this is a bit of a sore spot. In 2D work, I don't even notice the fan. But for games, this sucker is loud. And it's not a loudness I would call pleasant either. I can tolerate it, but I'm not exactly what you'd call happy with it.

IMO, the FX isn't a bad card. It's just not an R300-beater/killer by any stretch. Good choice for the loyal NVIDIA fan, not so good for everyone else. If you want to spend the money on it, feel free. But there are better choices out there. I'm not going to get rid of my FX, though. I think it's kind of campy - something that not everyone will be able to have. :cool:

[ricercar]

Originally posted by saturnotaku
I think it's kind of campy - something that not everyone will be able to have. :cool:

LOL! I didn't think about it in those terms, but that's part of the attraction for me, too.
- This card won't soon be forgotten
- This card won't ever be commonplace

and that's part of the charm.

[quik_2_win]

Originally posted by ricercar
PNY GeForce FX 5800 Ultra @ 300/600
3DMark03 = 5,949
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=542319

I'm trying to tweak for that magical 6,000, but my best attempts are resisted so far.
How did you manage such an impressive score with the card clocked at only 300/600 ? That doesn't make any sense, as your fill-rate is equal to cards running at 500/1000. Elaborate? I see LOTs of results on the ORB that report the clock speed of these cards @ 300/600- it might be a flaw in the software somewhere...

[ricercar]

Originally posted by quik_2_win
impressive score with the card clocked at only 300/600 ? That doesn't make any sense

Thinking it through logically, I see your point and agree this is senseless. My nine saved test results all indicate a 301/602 clock rate. Yet my 5800U was certainly clocked at 500/1000 for the 3D tests, as demostrated by the FX Flow fan kicking in.

My guess is that 3DMark software measures NVCLK and MCLK before the 3D test actually begins, and therefore captures the 2D clockspeed of 300/600. I'll test this by throttling down 3D mode clocks in the control panel and reposting results later tonight.

[ricercar]

Date 2003-04-28
3DMark Score 3784 3DMarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=672273

Core Clock 301 MHz
Memory Clock 602 MHz
3DMark Score
(3DMarks) 3784
Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury (fps) 142.5
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon (fps) 24.2
GT3 - Troll's Lair (fps) 19.4
GT4 - Mother Nature (fps) 24.1

[quik_2_win]

Thats really not a BAD score at all for an 'HONEST' 300/600. Thanks for sharing...

[bkswaney]

3DM03 reads the core clock when u open the program.
So it reads the 2D clock.
The 3D clock is 500/1000.
Your score is from the 3D clock not 2D.

[ricercar]

at 500/1000 my 5800U scores 59xx
at 300/600 my 5800U scores 37xx

[quik_2_win]

Originally posted by Zimm
What I ment by choppy is that when I leave a game, when you move the mouse it jutters across the screen, and there is lag when running any windows apps, but....

I think this is also associated to AC2 and I just didn't realize it, it appears AC2 has a memory leak....

Anywho thanks for the response!!
I believe there is a problem in the v43.45 driver that results in the symptoms that you have experienced. I, of course, am assuming you ARE running the 43.45 driver? Please, please, Nvidia release a new driver....

[SurfMonkey]

Originally posted by ricercar
Date 2003-04-28
3DMark Score 3784 3DMarks
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=672273

Core Clock 301 MHz
Memory Clock 602 MHz
3DMark Score
(3DMarks) 3784
Detailed Test Results
Game Tests
GT1 - Wings of Fury (fps) 142.5
GT2 - Battle of Proxycon (fps) 24.2
GT3 - Troll's Lair (fps) 19.4
GT4 - Mother Nature (fps) 24.1

Thanks for doing that. I've just got back from a week in Portugal which is why I didn't respond earlier :D

[ricercar]

You're welcome. I like my 5800U even when it's an ugly baby. I guess that most 5800 Ultra owners feel the same.

[Zimm]

threedaysdwn,

When I purchased my new PC I installed AC2 at the highest possible quality lvl, which required you to use the 3rd disk for most of the install, now when running at the selected lvl (which was still only high) I had a slow degrade of quality that eventualy made my computer reboot mid-game, the quailty was very very nice until it started to degrade. So I run it now at Medium and it works like a champ, I no longer have any lag with a group full of minors running around, and everything still looks very good, the water detail is amazing. I personaly wouldn't think you will see that much of a difference, even though AC2 claims to be a FX compatible game, with the current drivers it just doesn't allow us to use the full strength of the FX.




*quote*

****Zimm, how well does AC2 run on the FX?

I have a Radeon 9700 Pro and it's driving me crazy.


Some of my biggest gripes are the problems in AC2... specifically, Pixel Shaders cause all sorts of visual artifacts that get worse over time. Shadows cause horrible lagging.
And the cat 3.3 betas crash after about 30 seconds in game (3.2s crash less often, and 3.0s the least.... funny how that works).

I'm considering the move to a 5800U if I can find one, after reading of BK's satisfaction with the card.

So what problems have you had with AC2? It *is* a system resource hog... but I'm okay with that
No memory leaks in the game (any more) as far as I can tell.***

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Behemoth
This reviewer think there is virtually no difference between ATI's Performance and Quality modes.
He think ATI's Performance mode is virtually identical to NVIDIA's Balanced mode.
He think NVIDIA's Balanced mode is comparable to ATI's Quality mode as well as their Performance mode.
He is using 42.63 driver for nv30, very young driver, the latest driver is 43.51, things have changed a lot.
I am not saying anything, i just cant trust his benchmarks. :D

This guy is making a claim in another thread.

Can someone with a gfFX please verify that with the driver set to Quality(Appliction) AF is a lot faster when using 43.51 drivers compared to older ones?

If it's not too much trouble can someone post before and after results with 2 different driver sets. Thanks.

[marcocom]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by threedaysdwn

I'm considering the move to a 5800U if I can find one, after reading of BK's satisfaction with the card.
[QUOTE]

I love my 5800ultra.

i recommend that those who might be interested get them soon and get the BFG model . i honestly do not think there will be anymore fabricated (nvidia puts waay too much quality and money into this card and lost big $) and am pretty confident that the ASUS v9900 will never ship to the states. (classless sons of bitches arent even being honest with US retailers about it either) because simply...nvidia isnt making them anymore and only nvidia made them. if you buy from a US-only distributor like BFG, your gonna find they havent already sold all their stock in Japan and Europe like ASUS has.

so guys cancel those ASUS pre-orders if you have them. sorry i know it sucks.

its a really neat card. there is HUGE slowdown bug when enabling AnisotropicFiltering (or the TextureSharpening option. same thing) and until fixed in drivers, should be disabled.

frame thoroughput and smoothness cannot be measured by a benchmark and have to be judged by in-game play to be properly measured against the R3xx chip...and it is awesome for that.

but im afraid , to be honest, that i feel your 9700Pro is still just too viable and valuable a gaming card to replace it yet. your going to get more driver stability and faster OpenGL performance, but your gonna probably see equal to maybe even slower results from your upgrade and you could be opening the door to a whole bunch of new problems too. (powersupply issues, ATi to nvidia driver bugs. ive never been able to switch from one brand to another and get real results without a fresh OS. i dont know why. but either driver has issues when replacing the other in an old operating system.

honestly, i think too many ppl are running on (imo crap) thirdparty motherboard chipsets (like VIA or SiS) which have much more questionable stability and could honestly be the source of many peoples problems with their ATi drivers. (4in1 agp/ide driver patches every 6 months? talk about asking for small bugs and incompatibilities under stress. and gaming is the ultimate stress on a machine.)

good luck dude. but i think you should at least wait for nv35

[saturnotaku]

Originally posted by marcocom
there is HUGE slowdown bug when enabling AnisotropicFiltering (or the TextureSharpening option.

Can you run the fillrate tests in 3dmark 2001 with AF disabled and 2x AF? Is the bug still present from the GeForce4 Ti where scores without AF are proper (multitexturing being about 2x faster than single) but when you enabled 2xAF, single and multi-texturing scores are the same?

And yes, AF causes a performance hit - but I've found I can manage what levels of AF I use to still get acceptable performance with good image quality. It's all about trial and error with the games you play.