Warp2Search.net » News » January 2003 » German PC Games Receives GeForce FX - Preliminary Benchmarks & More
German PC Games Receives GeForce FX - Preliminary Benchmarks & More
Posted by: [PM] on: 01/26/2003 01:21 AM [ Print | 13 comment(s) ] · 7081 views
Thilo Bayer, hardware editor at PC Games Germany has received an GeForce FX for testing. The print magazine including the test will be on sale in the first week of February (February 5th, 2003 to be exact). More interestingly he has posted some early findings in the 3DCenter forums. I will try to summarize his findings.
Read more...
Preliminary Benchmark: Test system: AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM nForce 2 motherboard UT2k3 2166 - Flyby (2X FSAA / 4:1 Anisotropic Filtering 1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 110 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 143 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 65 FPS
UT2k3 2166 - Flyby (1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 201 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 196 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 170 FPS UT2k3 2166 - Botmatch (2X FSAA / 4:1 Anisotropic Filtering 1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 65 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 65 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 65 FPS
UT2k3 2166 - Botmatch (1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 71 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 68 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 71 FPS According to Thilo Bayer his sample board works with some basic hardware monitoring. The GeForce FX is adapting to the working environment you are currently running it in. This means: 1.) Working in 2D mode (a.k.a. desktop / office): core clock = 300Mhz / memory clock = 600Mhz 2.) Working in 3D mode (a.ka. games): core clock = 500Mhz / memory clock = 1000Mhz Mr. Bayer describes the FXFlow cooling system to be annoyingly loud and recommends 'ear plugs', which was to be expected. Furthermore his writings state that the A2 stepping is the final retail revision of the GeForce FX GPU/VPU. His card is apparantly no sample but a production card. He promised more results for tomorrow.
Read more...
Preliminary Benchmark: Test system: AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM nForce 2 motherboard UT2k3 2166 - Flyby (2X FSAA / 4:1 Anisotropic Filtering 1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 110 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 143 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 65 FPS
UT2k3 2166 - Flyby (1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 201 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 196 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 170 FPS UT2k3 2166 - Botmatch (2X FSAA / 4:1 Anisotropic Filtering 1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 65 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 65 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 65 FPS
UT2k3 2166 - Botmatch (1024x768x32Bit)ATi Radeon 9700 Pro - 71 FPSNvidia GeForce FX - 68 FPSNvidia Ti4600 - 71 FPS According to Thilo Bayer his sample board works with some basic hardware monitoring. The GeForce FX is adapting to the working environment you are currently running it in. This means: 1.) Working in 2D mode (a.k.a. desktop / office): core clock = 300Mhz / memory clock = 600Mhz 2.) Working in 3D mode (a.ka. games): core clock = 500Mhz / memory clock = 1000Mhz Mr. Bayer describes the FXFlow cooling system to be annoyingly loud and recommends 'ear plugs', which was to be expected. Furthermore his writings state that the A2 stepping is the final retail revision of the GeForce FX GPU/VPU. His card is apparantly no sample but a production card. He promised more results for tomorrow.
« Unreal Fortress 2003 Media · German PC Games Receives GeForce FX - Preliminary Benchmarks & More
· More Spice On ATI R350 »
Comment
|
cms Posts: 1 Joined: 2003-01-26 |
#40742 Posted on: 01/26/2003 01:33 AM
Geezz.... These numbers don't look so good. Not sure if it's because of the 128 bit memory bus or what, but it doesn't seem to be performing all that well. Looks like this maybe a card to avoid and wait for the refresh. Heck, if Nvidia don't get it together Ati maybe in a LOT of upcomming systems. Need 'ear plugs' for the fan... LOL |
Comment
|
rocky Posts: 0 Joined: 2007-12-04 |
#40744 Posted on: 01/26/2003 02:41 AM
don't say that i did not warn you ! a bloated expensive -2 slot behemoth @ 160 DB ~~~!!! :P costing probably 600 $ nice one .... and not being at all 30 % faster .... :P |
Comment
|
Manya Posts: 4 Joined: 2001-12-22 |
#40745 Posted on: 01/26/2003 02:41 AM
yer, it's looking pretty bad. I mean, the card is clocked way higher than the 9700PRO yet it is just breaking even. But i suppose i shouldn't say much more till more benchmarks arrive, as UT2K3 is known to be CPU dependant  |
Comment
|
Manya Posts: 4 Joined: 2001-12-22 |
#40746 Posted on: 01/26/2003 02:46 AM
accuall, the RRP is $399US, about the same as the 9700PRO on launch but it's still expensive. I also got to hear the sound the FX fan makes at AGDC (Australian Game Developers Confrence) and when I asked about it the guy replyed "well, many gamers play with headphones so it shouldn't be an issue" I suppose I'm not a gamer with my 5.1 speaker setup then  |
Comment
|
DarthBinky Unregistered |
#40752 Posted on: 01/26/2003 05:05 AM
Keep in mind that they could very well be hitting a CPU limitation with the numbers being as close as they are in some of those tests. |
Comment
|
Chosen_One Unregistered Posts: 11 Joined: 2004-02-06 |
#40754 Posted on: 01/26/2003 08:23 AM
GameStar (also a german game-magazin) has a geforce fx too...benshmarks not postet yet... |
Comment
|
GameTraveler Unregistered |
#40755 Posted on: 01/26/2003 08:57 AM
was thinking the same thing. Possibly try the same benchmarks using an Intel box as well to get a general idea of all possible combinations. |
Comment
|
Tikimotel Unregistered |
#40756 Posted on: 01/26/2003 10:41 AM
A 9500 hacked to 9700 scores almost the same scores with a 128Bit DDR bus as a plain 9700 with a 256Bit DDR bus... so there Who's performing worse? the 256Bit 9700 or the 128Bit 9500... I think the FX scores quite well, then but i see no reason for Nvidia to jump to 256Bit DDR II, when looking at the 9500 hacks. |
Comment
|
Thorz Unregistered Posts: 14 Joined: 2002-06-12 |
#40758 Posted on: 01/26/2003 11:07 AM
Jezzz... the loud noise, the bad numbers, let me tell youm thus card sucks big time, I think that Nvidia is experimenting the "Vodoo" effect, ir reminds me so much the Vodoo 5, a mamout! For me I think I'll pass, I preffer to wait to march and buy one of the new ATIs that are comming (R350). I am possitive that they will be a killer for this mammout. Nvidia has let us down.... this is a big dissapointing. Normally hardware products that are SO DELAY are always a dissapointing, this card should have been out 6 months ago for compiting directly with the ATI R300. I just hope for the love of God that AMD's Hammer doesn't be the same history, because then that would be really the end of the CPU wars, and our pockets will suffer again only in the hands of Chipcilla :-) |
Comment
|
rocky Unregistered Posts: 0 Joined: 2007-12-04 |
#40771 Posted on: 01/26/2003 04:57 PM
hey amigo, i think that amd and ati have been living and walking on the edge for far too long .... but they 've come back time after time .... and so they will again .... :P cheaper faster products .... putting the bloated super-expensive counterparts to shame ... |
Comment
|
rocky Unregistered Posts: 0 Joined: 2007-12-04 |
#40772 Posted on: 01/26/2003 05:02 PM
dear dear ... the part is not released yet .. .and for the 500/1000 part here in the uk , a rather reliable hardware ventor that i know - has set up preorders for almost 400 squids. that's about 600 $ or E for ya ...... nice eh ? for an Xtra loud, Xtra big, part that might actually crash a lot on a confined system, because of the external heat ...... :P heheheheh whatever ...... when and i the fx makes it ...we'll see. but i won't be holding my breath |
Comment
|
AronSchatz Unregistered |
#40775 Posted on: 01/26/2003 07:15 PM
To the Person about the 9500 to 9700 hack... No kidding, but your wrong. The reason it is as good or even better is because the 9500 (NON PRO) boards that were being hacked up were ALREADY 9700 Boards to begin with! The already had 256Bit wide memory and the hack enabled the other 4 pipelines. Get your facts straight. Ohh, and I do believe that ATI will be the performance champ for 2003 at least. They already have a lead for the current DX9 generation of cores. |
Comment
|
Faust Unregistered |
#40781 Posted on: 01/26/2003 10:02 PM
To the Person about the 9500 to 9700 hack... No kidding, but your wrong. The reason it is as good or even better is because the 9500 (NON PRO) boards that were being hacked up were ALREADY 9700 Boards to begin with! The already had 256Bit wide memory and the hack enabled the other 4 pipelines. Get your facts straight. Ohh, and I do believe that ATI will be the performance champ for 2003 at least. They already have a lead for the current DX9 generation of cores. Amen brotha. Thanks for stating that facts. And after seeing the FX5800 Ultra scores I have to agree that ATi will be top dog in 2003. |
