Re: Was the FX series a failure?
I think the problem with the FX series was that it got off to the bad start with the nv30 and actually later got another kicking later. The nv30 came out of the blocks and was expected to be quicker than the current ATI, but it was not, so a general ill feeling developed. The later kicking was when DX9 games came out and round 2 of the nv30's failings became apparent.
Two hardware flaws in the 128 bit bus and 4xN pipeline seemed to be the main problem, as well as nvidia's DX9 shader problems. They could not do too much about the last two, but they did go to a 256 bit bus for the 5900 series and at that point things started to look up. Also the drivers actually managed to give it some polish and make the best of a fairly poor lot. The 5900XT was an excellent card for the money for the majority of games in it's timeframe.
5200 -> bad
5200U -> poor to average for it's price point
5500 -> bad
5600 -> poor
5600U -> poor to average.
5700 -> average
5700U -> good
5900U -> good
5900XT -> very good for it's price point
5950u -> good
the main success the FX achieved was actually connected toit's bad points in that those bad points made nvidia learn some lessons. I think you can see how well it learn;t those lessons in the 6800 series today