Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA Legacy Graphics Cards

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-23-04, 06:38 AM   #13
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
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.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 06:56 AM   #14
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by saturnotaku
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.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 07:21 AM   #15
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
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.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 10:52 AM   #16
Zoolook
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1
Red face Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

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.
Zoolook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 11:07 AM   #17
Sworkhard
Persistence Pays Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 77
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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
5900xt @ stock

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.
__________________
Impact Computing
Asus K7V880; XP2500+ @ 2310 (11*210); Antec SL400; Gigabyte 5900xt @ 475/763
Sworkhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 02:31 PM   #18
Daneel Olivaw
Northwood hugger
 
Daneel Olivaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,244
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

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?
__________________
-Intel Core2 Duo 4300 (3.0GHz) | Asus P5N-E SLI | 6GB Corsair CVS PC2-5300 | GF8800GT 512MB | Western Digital 1TB Raid0 | Antec SLK2600AMB | Antec Earthwatts 500W
-Intel Pentium4 2.4C (3.4GHz) | Asus P4P800 Dlx | 2GB Crucial Rendition PC-3200 | GF6800LE 128MB | Seagate 200GB | Antec Overture II | Antec TruePower 2.0 480W


Mild agnosticism —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say "I don't know, but maybe you do."
Daneel Olivaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 02:52 PM   #19
Fahim
R420, NV40
 
Fahim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In Front Of My PC
Posts: 164
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Naah, 9500 PRO 8 Pipe is not a softmod.
__________________
AMD Athlon64 X2 6000+ | ASUS CROSSHAIR | 2 x 1GB Corsair XMS PC2-6400 DDR2 800MHz | ATI RADEON HD 3870 512MB (800,2340) | PNY GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB (513,1584) | ATI RADEON HD 2900XT 512MB | Leadtek WinFast GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB (500,1584)
Fahim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 07:32 PM   #20
Sworkhard
Persistence Pays Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 77
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?
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.
__________________
Impact Computing
Asus K7V880; XP2500+ @ 2310 (11*210); Antec SL400; Gigabyte 5900xt @ 475/763
Sworkhard is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 10-23-04, 08:01 PM   #21
Daneel Olivaw
Northwood hugger
 
Daneel Olivaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,244
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

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.
__________________
-Intel Core2 Duo 4300 (3.0GHz) | Asus P5N-E SLI | 6GB Corsair CVS PC2-5300 | GF8800GT 512MB | Western Digital 1TB Raid0 | Antec SLK2600AMB | Antec Earthwatts 500W
-Intel Pentium4 2.4C (3.4GHz) | Asus P4P800 Dlx | 2GB Crucial Rendition PC-3200 | GF6800LE 128MB | Seagate 200GB | Antec Overture II | Antec TruePower 2.0 480W


Mild agnosticism —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say "I don't know, but maybe you do."
Daneel Olivaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-04, 08:22 PM   #22
Sworkhard
Persistence Pays Off
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 77
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

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.
__________________
Impact Computing
Asus K7V880; XP2500+ @ 2310 (11*210); Antec SL400; Gigabyte 5900xt @ 475/763
Sworkhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-04, 02:39 AM   #23
zakelwe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 768
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
3dmark also is pixel shader limited. But geometry plays a huge role in 3dmark's performance too.




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
zakelwe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-04, 02:57 AM   #24
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: why do fx cards perform so badly in 3dmark05

Quote:
Originally Posted by zakelwe
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.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2 Video Cards -- Disable Open GL on single? amites NVIDIA Linux 5 05-30-12 04:51 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.