The Last Bout of ‘03 – NVIDIA’s GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
by Derek Wilson on October 23, 2003 9:30 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
C&C Generals: Zero Hour Performance no AA/AF
The 5700 Ultra shows a bit of a performance edge over the other two NVIDIA cards we tested here, but still falls short of anything ATI. Oddly though, it looks to me like there is an issue with the different ways these cards are handling timing the frames. The ATI cards all have instantaneous maximum frame rates into the hundreds, while the 5700 Ultra only reaches 76. The 5600 and 4200 don't even make it over 60.
All of the cards have the same minimum frame rate at 15 frames per second.
C&C Generals: Zero Hour Performance 4xAA/8xAF
We see a similar trend with ATI cards coming out ahead of the NVIDIA solutions, but the 5700 Ultra does a good job of approaching the 9600 Pro in this benchmark. With the exception of the 4200 card, the min frame rates were again at 15.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
114 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
The review at Extreme Tech lines up with Anadtechs review. Both on FPS and IQ. Im still checking out other reviews on other sites though. So far it seems to me that there anrt any worthy problems with AT's review.Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
It's so sad that when ATi might have real competition in the midrange, the fanATIcs are still out in full force, labeling any site that doesn't trash nVidia as "biased" and "bought".And when in the blue hell has having an ad from a company meant the site is biased? THG, for example, has AMD, Intel, ATi, nVidia, and XGI ads on its pages. Ads are how sites make money.
Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
Some of you guys have to get out more.Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
face fact girls who keep complaining. from what i see, both ati and nvidia both make great cards. buy whichever suits your needs.Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
Whats going on with that Ti4200 on homeworld 2!!!!Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
jesus, fanatics get all pissy if their card loses in FPS tests... you act like every consumer who reads this review will be swayed into believing that NV sells a superior midrange card... its obvious that the "ATI v NV" battle is personal to u... my only question is why? are you guys trying to justify your purchases by bashing something that poses a threat? personally, i dont let hardware sites choose what i buy... i often times purchase 2 contending cards, and take it upon myself to determine which is better... the winner stays in my machine, the loser goes back to where it came from...Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
Kyle is just pissed he didnt get invited to NVIDIA's editorial day (or he didnt get paid enough to go to Editorial Day), while NVIDIA probably just canceled an advertisement deal with Tom.Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
#10: ATI ads are in the same article on the right sidE!!!!Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
Well I am going to read the 5950 review in this site. If the comments section will be this lame, that will be my last...Sorry, but the gfx card reviews are getting worse and worse in each review.. No in depth analysis, no IQ comparisons.. At the end, given the frame rates, I still believe that 9600XT is a better card than 5700 given that that card has almost %60 of the bandwidth that 5700 has and still beats it in most of the AA tests.
I appreciate the amount of work here, but if you can not do it right, that do not do it..
Best,
Anonymous User - Thursday, October 23, 2003 - link
#28 sorry but i was in a big hurry.