New BFG Tech 5900U Review

[AnteP]

Originally posted by maxpower
That'd be pretty easy if we all lived on the same block, which we don't. jk Seriously, I agree. Roundups are awesome but logistics to allow for that aren't so easy.

Why not have one person doing the review of all boards?
Or are some of these boards purchased by nVnews crew or something?

In any case it's nice to see people trying new things. One shouldn't get too hung up on "this is how it's supposed to look" IMHO.

Why not have one person doing the review of all boards?

Time. Some of us have, you know, jobs and school and stuff

[Clay]

Originally posted by The Baron
Time. Some of us have, you know, jobs and school and stuff

Yeah, I have a job, two boys under the age of two, etc, etc... I agree thought that roundups are also probably the most useful form of review....they're also the most time consuming and expensive kind of review to do though.

[AnteP]

Originally posted by The Baron
Time. Some of us have, you know, jobs and school and stuff

You mean... now I have to make sure I get this straight, you have a life?
Have you talked to one of those "gurlz" i keep hearing about on the IRC?

j/k

Point taken.

[Clay]

Originally posted by AnteP
You mean... now I have to make sure I get this straight, you have a life?
Have you talked to one of those "gurlz" i keep hearing about on the IRC?

j/k

Point taken.

LOL! Good one. Yeah, I'm sure we all agree with your point too. My next review will be a comparsion review for sure. Thanks.

[quik_2_win]

It was a good review- certainly casts the card in a positive light. Sometimes the objective view is easier to digest than a bunch of numbers for us to compare, however, those numbers are very critical for someone spending big money for a top-of-the-line graphics board. Certainly nothing wrong with being 'personable', and being realistic in your judgements about image quality- I agree in most cases with the points that you made. Keep in mind this product costs $500 USD. It deserves (begs) to be scrutinized...

[Clay]

Originally posted by quik_2_win
It was a good review- certainly casts the card in a positive light. Sometimes the objective view is easier to digest than a bunch of numbers for us to compare, however, those numbers are very critical for someone spending big money for a top-of-the-line graphics board. Certainly nothing wrong with being 'personable', and being realistic in your judgements about image quality- I agree in most cases with the points that you made. Keep in mind this product costs $500 USD. It deserves (begs) to be scrutinized...

Thanks for the feedback. Agreed, continued/more scutiny is in order. I tried to find faults with it from an overall perspective and really couldn't. There are obviously some issues with the NV35 (and not BFG Tech specifically) that require more attention but it just wasn't in the scope of this review. All things considered the card is a very high quality/high performing card. Cards based on reference designs are kind of tricky because you're basically reviewing NVIDIA (in this case) and not the partner company. I would take a more aggressive approach now, in hindsight, with a card that actually was modified in some way by the partner company.

[Cotita]

I liked the review, playing real games (or demos for that matter) is better than synthetic benchmarks IMO. And I agree in the Still vs in game IQ. I've always said that I play games not benchmarks, nor still frames. 3rd person shooters won't give you time to "smell the flowers" so you won't notice IQ issues if any.

One thing is missing tough

Stock speed benchmarks, not all BFG cards (or any 5900 ultra for that matter) OC to 500/900+ mhz, most 5900 ultra cards I've seen (in reviews and reported by users) won't reach 500mhz on the core, more like 480~490 so a BFG retail card may not reach your OC speeds.

Not that it makes a a big difference, since its only like 10% OC and it doesn't translate in 10% higher performance. Maybe I 'm just picky.

[Clay]

Originally posted by Cotita
One thing is missing tough

Stock speed benchmarks, not all BFG cards (or any 5900 ultra for that matter) OC to 500/900+ mhz, most 5900 ultra cards I've seen (in reviews and reported by users) won't reach 500mhz on the core, more like 480~490 so a BFG retail card may not reach your OC speeds.

Thanks for the feedback Cotita. This was a BFG retail card though. Also, [H]ardOCP's review of this same card yielded similar OC results/stability.

My reasoning behind running all tests at OC settings is that cards of this caliber will most likely be pushed to these limits by those that buy them anyway. I agree that having stock speeds as a comparison is important to a degree but my timeframe just didn't allow for it with this review. I will be including stock speeds in future reviews. Thanks again!

[Cotita]

I see your point, but I really don't agree with it completely.

5900 ultras are already pretty much pushed to their limits with their stock speeds. And as I said most of them are not very overclockable, although that will change in time as manufacturing process matures. My point is that 5900 ultra users most likely won't risk their card for only mild overclocking and not a significant performance increase. The geforceFX 5900 already is hot enough to stress the card even more.

In comparison a 5600 ultra (flip chip) is a great overclocker (getting close to 500/900 o even higher) and most likely will be pushed to its limits by their users.

But then again maybe I'm just picky

[Badash]

Why does no 5900U reviews make any comments on the flickering issue? That I've read anyways.

I don't think any reviewer has encountered it. And if a reviewer hasn't encountered it, well, they can't comment on it.