|
|
|
What happened to my performance ???
|
Original Message
|
Name: Zero Cool
Date: September 19, 2003 at 13:59:54 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ???OS: Windows XP ProfessionalCPU/Ram: Athlon XP 2400+ TB / 1,53 |
Comment: I just upgraded from a Geforce 4 TI 4200 128mb to a Geforce FX 5600 256mb I ran 3DMark 2003 and my score went from 1,611 to 2,155, I thought fantastic, so I ran 3DMark 2001 SE, my score went from 10,617 to 7,865, also my games have gone a little slower though DX9 games run fine I have turned all my options to max performance but still can't get better performance, games seem to be lagging and it's very annoying I thought the Geforce FX 5600 256mb was a tidy card and I am using the latest drivers Please tell me what happened Thanks Zero Cool
Report Offensive Message For Removal
|
|
Response Number 1
|
Name: Free Weasel
Date: September 19, 2003 at 14:48:46 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)Check the 3D settings of your new card. Is it possible that you don't have the optimal settings in the driver??? And if you use the original driver try the newest detonator driver from nVidia instead !!!
 Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 2
|
Name: RPGreg2600
Date: September 19, 2003 at 14:49:21 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)Simple, the Geforce FX cards are pieces of s---. If you can, I'd suggest returning it and getting a radeon card, either a 9600 pro or a 9800 pro.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 3
|
Name: Kevn
Date: September 19, 2003 at 15:05:04 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ???
|
Reply: (edit)The 5600 isn't really an upgrade from the 4200. The 5800 is though. All the 5600 does that is better compared to the 4200 is give better fps in dx9 games since it supports dx9. I get the same fps in some games with my 9800pro as i did with my 4600. But in dx9 it's very different, and when it comes to graphic intensive moments it runs much faster.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 4
|
Name: johnoh
Date: September 19, 2003 at 15:34:43 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)nvidia makes a big effort to tune drivers to optimize certain benchmarks. 3dmark2001 has been laid aside for the sake of 3dmark2003. You get higher 3dmark2001 scores with older nvidia drivers, higher 3dmark2003 scores with newer drivers. Nevertheless, your 5600 should not be in the 7000s.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 5
|
Name: Kevn
Date: September 19, 2003 at 15:55:38 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ???
|
Reply: (edit)Check these reviews..
The 5600 doesn't get over 12000 in 3dmark2k1, with a 3ghz ddr400 system. http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/geforcefx5600/index3.htm In this link you can see the 4600 clearly beats the 5600:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/gffx/nv31-nv34.html#p14
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 6
|
Name: johnoh
Date: September 19, 2003 at 18:32:41 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)Seems like a year ago Nvidia took all their top guys out of geforce and put them into nforce2.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 8
|
Name: johnoh
Date: September 19, 2003 at 18:52:57 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)because nforce1 was a dog but then nforce2 is awesome, and geforce4 was awesome but then geforcefx has struggled.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 9
|
Name: Kevn
Date: September 19, 2003 at 19:59:26 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ???
|
Reply: (edit)Think they just put more attention towards their 5800 & 5900 since they didn't have much time to catch up with ATI. But i bet they did take some of their top guys out for nForce. Or maybe they only worked on the top cards like the 5800 ect. I find it kind of weird that the 5600 has higher clocks than the 4600 and the 4600 beats it. Maybe something about the internal design?? Don't know much about that.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 10
|
Name: johnoh
Date: September 20, 2003 at 11:12:54 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)I agree its a design issue. Nvidia aimed the gf4 at 3dmark2001 and the fx at 3dmark2003 using AA/AF. The 5600 beats the 4600 handily in the latter case.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 11
|
Name: macdaddy
Date: September 20, 2003 at 17:57:03 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)fx5600 non ultra = 325MHz core/650MHz memory. fx5600 ultra ver.1.0 = 350MHz core/700MHz memory. fx5600 ultra ver.2.0 = 400MHz core/800MHz memory. try oc'ing it.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 12
|
Name: Zero Cool
Date: September 21, 2003 at 10:16:41 Pacific
Subject: What happened to my performance ??? |
Reply: (edit)Sorry I am late replying, been very busy Just replaced my Geforce FX 5600 256mb for a Radeon 9600 Pro 128mb and the speed increase is awesome Gained 4000 points on 3DMark 2001 SE and I gained an extra 600 points on 3DMark 2003 over the Geforce FX 5600 256mb I am staying with ATI from now on, NVIDIA can go to hell, their graphic cards suck lately, perhaps that will all change with their new models in the future Thanks for the reply guys :) Zero Cool
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
Use following form to reply to current message:
|
|
|
