Geeky1University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
edited October 2003
I think the FX5200 is faster, but DX9 support is irrelevant in this case. The FX5200 is too slow to run any DX9 program AFAIK. If you really want to upgrade, you need to check newegg's refurb section for a Radeon 9600, 9500, Ti4200 or Ti4400. Also start looking for a regular (non-LE) ATi Radeon 8500 64MB/128MB. The best 128MB cards had BGA RAM, so look for that. The 8500 will eat the 5200 for breakfast, and they usually go for <$100. Unfortunately, the FX5200 is basically crap, and overclocking it is only going to get you so far. It'll certainly help, but the entire GeForceFX line is, (IMO) the biggest flop in the history of the graphics industry. nVidia screwed up, and they screwed up Big Time. So yeah, if you're looking to upgrade, start checking www.newegg.com 's refurb section, and ebay. Depending on how much you want to spend (I'll assume <$150) look for one of the following cards:
(Fastest to slowest)
ATi Radeon 9500 Pro
ATi Radeon 9600 Pro (the 9500 Pro is indeed faster)
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4600
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4400/4800SE
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4200/4200-8x
nVidia GeForceFX 5600 Ultra
ATi Radeon 9500
ATi Radeon 9600
nVidia GeForceFX 5600
ATi Radeon 8500
Leadtek ATi Radeon 9100 (ONLY the Leadtek), ATi Radeon 8500LE (Built by ATi only)
nVidia GeForceFX 5200
ATi Radeon 9000 Pro/9200
ATi Radeon 9000/9200SE
That's roughly right. The ATi cards are ranked exactly right, to the best of my knowledge. The nVidia cards may be a little off, but not by much.
Also, if you get a Ti4200, remember that they are not all created equal. I've heard of some that have had the memory bus cut in 1/2 to 64 bits, which KILLS performance. Absolutely flat-out kills it. Stick with ABIT, ASUS, Albatron, Leadtek, VisionTek, Gainward/Cardexpert and PNY for nVidia based cards, and you should be fine.
Hi everyone, this is my first post on these boards (I just discovered them yesterday) and I think the video card ranking is awesome and I am nominating it for a sticky, perhaps with a topic name change. I am glad that someone actually took the time to create that list and now I can point my comp illiterate friends to it when they ask me if video card a is better than video card b.
You have to keep in mind that the list is purely in terms of 3d performance. I would never buy a GeForce FX 5600/5800/5900 because of it's undesirably LOUD cooling solution that also occupies one of my precious PCI slots. I don't have enough of those anyway.
I'll create a new sticky post regarding the "3D Card Performance Listing" and get everyone who wants to create a list to post theirs in it.
//Edit: I've got a listing done, but it's organized into Direct-X Compatability levels, to show IMHO what cards perform like in each category that they support.
This listing is compiled from a boatload of benchmarks I've read from at least 25 different hardware sites on the internet. When cards came into a tie for performance, their theoretical fill rate and theoretical memory-bandwidth @ 100% efficiency was weighed against their competitor and the better part was awarded a higher stance on the rating. Yes, this listing may be a little off, but I'm only human.
No, I've not used all of these cards first-hand, but I have utilized a lot of them at one point or another over the last 4 years. If you don't agree, post away! We'll get this all cleared up eventually.
//Edit: I'm measuring performace with each card according to how they stand up to their sister products and competitor's products in the highest DirectX class the component is designed to work in.
IE, if the card supports DX9 & DX8, it's weighted against all other DX9 cards only.
<TABLE WIDTH="500" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2" BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="40"></TD><TD>Direct3D 9.0 Performance<BR>Radeon 9800XT-9500 Series, GeForce FX Series</TD></TR></TABLE>
ATI Radeon 9800 XT
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
Nvidia GeForce FX 5950 Ultra
Nvidia GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9800
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
ATI Radeon 9700
Nvidia GeForce FX 5800 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
Nvidia GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
ATI Radeon 9500
Nvidia GeForce FX 5600 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9600
Nvidia GeForce FX 5600
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200
<TABLE WIDTH="500" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2" BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="40"></TD><TD>Direct3D 8.1 Performance<BR>Radeon 9200-8500 Series, GeForce 3 & 4 Ti Series</TD></TR></TABLE>
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4800-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4600
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4800SE-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4400
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4200-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4200
ATI Radeon 8500 DV
ATI Radeon 8500
Nvidia GeForce 3 Ti500
ATI Radeon 9200 Pro
ATI Radeon 8500 LE
ATI Radeon 9100
Nvidia GeForce 3
Matrox Parhelia 512
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
Nvidia GeForce 3 Ti200
ATI Radeon 9000
ATI Radeon 9200
How are you measuring performance here because I had an MSI TI4800se that I replaced with a 9600pro and in dx8.1 stuff the 4800se owned the 9600pro even with the clocks on it at 478core/680mem.
This was backed up by running the U.T.2K3 benchmarks on both cards.
Default 3D Mark 2001 on the 9600pro was like 10,000+ and the TI4800se was 12,000+ at default clocks on a stock clocked 2500+ in a sn41g2 shuttle cube with 512megs of twin-x llpt-3200.
I'm measuring performace with each card according to how they stand up to their sister products and competitor's products in the highest DirectX class the component is designed to work in.
IE, if the card supports DX9 & DX8, it's weighted against all other DX9 cards only.
It sure makes comparing how DX9-compliant video cards are going to perform on DirectX-9 enabled game titles difficult. All we've really got is AquaMark and 3DMark to gauge performance, but that's only simulated and not an indicitive gauge of real-world performance.
Once the titles start coming though, it will be interesting to see how the cards fall.
I'd love to see this thread continually updated with all of the new cards that are released. I do not think any other website on the net has a list like this.
Another Note - the cards used in that test were only reference cards, hopefully some of the actual cards released to the public will be benchmarked.
Umm yeah there are non ultra versions of all the FX's, all the ones before these 2 newer ones that is.
I have no clue if they plan to release non ultras of them.
And who says the 5900 or 5600 has a loud fan? The 5800 Ultra was the only one to have a leaf-blower strapped to it and as for PCI slot number 1 being blocked, no big deal anyways as you shouldn't have a card in there anyways, at least if you value your videocard's performance.
The AGP port and PCI slot 1 share an IRQ so by running them together you lower the resources for your video card and in some extreme cases can cause stabilty problems for the video card.
The 5900/5900U & 5600/5600U fans are very quiet, on par with the fans utilized on the GF4 & ATI Radeon 9x00 series (except the 9800 XT).
And, I 100% agree that you shouldn't use a PCI card in PCI Slot # 1. It does share an IRQ with the AGP slot and severely impeeds airflow to the AGP card's fan.
As long as the cooler is quiet and effective, I don't care if it uses 2 expansion slots.
As for the 5700 & 5950, AFAIK there are only 5700's, 5700 Ultra's and 5950's.
Comments
(Fastest to slowest)
ATi Radeon 9500 Pro
ATi Radeon 9600 Pro (the 9500 Pro is indeed faster)
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4600
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4400/4800SE
nVidia GeForce4 Ti4200/4200-8x
nVidia GeForceFX 5600 Ultra
ATi Radeon 9500
ATi Radeon 9600
nVidia GeForceFX 5600
ATi Radeon 8500
Leadtek ATi Radeon 9100 (ONLY the Leadtek), ATi Radeon 8500LE (Built by ATi only)
nVidia GeForceFX 5200
ATi Radeon 9000 Pro/9200
ATi Radeon 9000/9200SE
That's roughly right. The ATi cards are ranked exactly right, to the best of my knowledge. The nVidia cards may be a little off, but not by much.
Also, if you get a Ti4200, remember that they are not all created equal. I've heard of some that have had the memory bus cut in 1/2 to 64 bits, which KILLS performance. Absolutely flat-out kills it. Stick with ABIT, ASUS, Albatron, Leadtek, VisionTek, Gainward/Cardexpert and PNY for nVidia based cards, and you should be fine.
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
nVidia GeForceFX 5900 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
nVidia GeForceFX 5800 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9800
ATI Radeon 9700
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
nVidia GeForceFX 5600 Ultra
nVidia GeForce4 TI4600
nVidia GeForce4 TI4800 SE (1% faster than the 4400)
nVidia GeForce4 TI4400
nVidia GeForce4 TI4200-8X
nVidia GeForce4 TI4200
ATI Radeon 9500
ATI Radeon 9600
nVidia GeForceFX 5600
mVidia GeForceFX 5200
ATI Radeon 8500
nVidia GeForce3 TI500
nVidia GeForce3
nvidia GeForce3 TI200
ATI Radeon 9100/ATI Radeon 8500LE
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro/9200
ATI Radeon 9000/9200SE
nVidia GeForce2 Ti
GeForce4 MX460
nVidia GeForce2 ULTRA
GeForce4 MX440
3DFX VooDoo 5 6000
3DFX VooDoo 5 5500
nVidia GeForce2 GTS
3DFX VooDoo5 5000
GeForce4 MX420
nVidia GeForce DDR
nVidia GeForce2 MX400
nVidia GeForce2 MX
nVidia GeForce SDR
nVidia GeForce2 MX200
3DFX VooDoo4
nVidia TNT2 ULTRA
nVidia TNT2
3DFX VooDoo3
nVidia TNT
3DFX VooDoo2 12MB
3DFX VooDoo2 8MB
3DFX VooDoo RUSH
3DFX VooDoo Banshee
PowerVR SG
3DFX VooDoo
And 3D began here, bringing light to a world of darkness.
now average prices next to each of those would bring light to my wallet
Radeon 9700:
FILL RATE: 275 MHz x 8 Pipelines x 1 TMU per Pipeline = 2.0 Gigapixels/sec
MEM BAND: (256-bit x 270 MHz x 2 DDR) / 8 = 17.2 GB/sec
Radeon 9600XT:
FILL RATE: 500 MHz x 4 Pipelines x 1 TMU per Pipeline = 2.0 Gigapixels/sec
MEM BAND: (128-bit x 300 MHz x 2 DDR) / 8 = 9.6 GB/sec
Here you can definately see that the 9700 outperforms the 9600XT, especially during high-resolutions & with AA & AF enabled.
patriot71
-drasnor
//Edit: I've got a listing done, but it's organized into Direct-X Compatability levels, to show IMHO what cards perform like in each category that they support.
Enjoy
It's only been a year... nothing serious.
Yeah, I promised to write a guide for you n00b vbulletin moderators
That was about an year ago as well :o
No, I've not used all of these cards first-hand, but I have utilized a lot of them at one point or another over the last 4 years. If you don't agree, post away! We'll get this all cleared up eventually.
//Edit: I'm measuring performace with each card according to how they stand up to their sister products and competitor's products in the highest DirectX class the component is designed to work in.
IE, if the card supports DX9 & DX8, it's weighted against all other DX9 cards only.
<TABLE WIDTH="500" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2" BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="40">
ATI Radeon 9800 XT
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
Nvidia GeForce FX 5950 Ultra
Nvidia GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9800
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
ATI Radeon 9700
Nvidia GeForce FX 5800 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro
Nvidia GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
ATI Radeon 9500
Nvidia GeForce FX 5600 Ultra
ATI Radeon 9600
Nvidia GeForce FX 5600
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200
<TABLE WIDTH="500" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2" BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="40">
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4800-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4600
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4800SE-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4400
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4200-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti4200
ATI Radeon 8500 DV
ATI Radeon 8500
Nvidia GeForce 3 Ti500
ATI Radeon 9200 Pro
ATI Radeon 8500 LE
ATI Radeon 9100
Nvidia GeForce 3
Matrox Parhelia 512
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
Nvidia GeForce 3 Ti200
ATI Radeon 9000
ATI Radeon 9200
<TABLE WIDTH="500" CELLSPACING="2" CELLPADDING="2" BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="40">
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX 460
ATI Radeon 7500 Pro
Nvidia GeForce 2 Ultra
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX 440-8X
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX 440
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX 440-SE
Nvidia GeForce 2 Titanium
Nvidia GeForce 2 Pro
ATI Radeon 7500
3DFX Voodoo 5 6000
Nvidia GeForce 2 GTS
3DFX Voodoo 5 5500
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX 420
Nvidia GeForce 256 DDR
3DFX Voodoo 5 5000
ATI Radeon 256 DDR
ATI Radeon 7200 SDR
Nvidia GeForce 2 MX 400
Nvidia GeForce 2 MX
Nvidia GeForce 256 SDR
3DFX Voodoo 4 4500
ATI Radeon 7000 DDR
ATI Radeon 256 SDR
Nvidia GeForce 2 MX 200
This was backed up by running the U.T.2K3 benchmarks on both cards.
Default 3D Mark 2001 on the 9600pro was like 10,000+ and the TI4800se was 12,000+ at default clocks on a stock clocked 2500+ in a sn41g2 shuttle cube with 512megs of twin-x llpt-3200.
IE, if the card supports DX9 & DX8, it's weighted against all other DX9 cards only.
Once the titles start coming though, it will be interesting to see how the cards fall.
BTW, Welcome to Short-Media madmat!
I like it.
NS
http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD02NDQmdXJsX3BhZ2U9MQ==
Tech
I'd love to see this thread continually updated with all of the new cards that are released. I do not think any other website on the net has a list like this.
Another Note - the cards used in that test were only reference cards, hopefully some of the actual cards released to the public will be benchmarked.
I have no clue if they plan to release non ultras of them.
And who says the 5900 or 5600 has a loud fan? The 5800 Ultra was the only one to have a leaf-blower strapped to it and as for PCI slot number 1 being blocked, no big deal anyways as you shouldn't have a card in there anyways, at least if you value your videocard's performance.
The AGP port and PCI slot 1 share an IRQ so by running them together you lower the resources for your video card and in some extreme cases can cause stabilty problems for the video card.
And, I 100% agree that you shouldn't use a PCI card in PCI Slot # 1. It does share an IRQ with the AGP slot and severely impeeds airflow to the AGP card's fan.
As long as the cooler is quiet and effective, I don't care if it uses 2 expansion slots.
As for the 5700 & 5950, AFAIK there are only 5700's, 5700 Ultra's and 5950's.
Right below/even with the 9700 np?
Identical card performance wise.
most of my games use that API