Jump to content
LCVG

Nvidia unveils its latest card. Doom III Benchmarks!


Romier S
 Share

Recommended Posts

lHere it is:

 

Nvidia has today announced the GeForce FX 5900, codenamed NV35, and the graphics card is expected to offer cutting-edge performance when it ships to retail stores next month. The latest GeForce FX design is a generation beyond the much-delayed GeForce FX 5800, which was announced earlier this year but only saw limited distribution. Even if it's surprising to see Nvidia make such a big jump so soon, it's not hard to explain. A second engineering team was working on the 5900 in parallel with preparations for the original GeForce FX, so the delays didn't affect the new chip's schedule.

 

The GeForce FX 5900 will provide improvements in a number of different areas, with a much quieter cooling system, improved image quality, and higher overall performance. The performance improvements can largely be attributed to the much higher memory bandwidth. Like ATI's Radeon 9700 and 9800, the 5900 features a 256-bit memory bus to roughly double how much data can be transferred to and from the card's memory. This more than offsets the slightly lower clock speeds of the 5900 as compared to the 5800. The chip's core will run at 450MHz and the memory will be running at 425MHz (effectively 850MHz). The chip is being manufactured on a dense .13-micron process.

 

Apart from raw speed, the 5900 will have some features intended to speed up performance in upcoming games with advanced graphics engines. The CineFX 2.0 pixel shader engine will double performance for some DirectX 9 special effects, including those that use the 128-bit floating point color standard. The new UltraShadow feature is designed to make it possible for developers to accelerate the new generation of games with dynamic lighting and shadows, like Doom III.

 

The GeForce FX 5900 is a large card and takes up two expansion slots. But unlike the 5800, the 5900 is a quiet card. With bleeding-edge performance and forward-looking features, the 5900 is aimed at those gaming enthusiasts willing to pay for the best hardware available. Nvidia expects that cards based on the 5900 design will carry a suggested retail price of $499. The new cards are expected to ship in June.

 

Source: http://www.gamespot.com/all/news/news_6027155.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with admitting a mistake and correcting it? Personally I'm glad Nvidia's gotten their act back together. I was not relishing the idea of holding my nose and installing a Radeon.

 

Interestingly, ATI rushed out an announcement of their 256MB DDR Radeon 9800 Pro in response. Someone must be concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Nvidia has a winner on its hands. I'm glad to see them back in the game as the 5800 was really a horrid debacle for them. As a current ATI 9700 pro owner though Joel, I'd suggest you really give them a shot to impress.(this is coming from a previous Nvidia only owner). They have really stepped up thier game and make some stellar products. Thier drivers have improved DRASTICALLY and the image quality offered on the cards has been unbeatable. Regardless of what has come in the past, it wont change whats here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever's the best when D3 arrives, that's what I'll get

 

heh. We should be hearing a new announcement on ATI's next card. The next iteration of the graphics core is the R400-R450. Supposedly dubbed the 9900 pro, it should be announced soon. Technology afterall stops for no one.

 

Also I'd like to see some side by side comparisons between the 9800 pro and 5900 Ultra in regards to AA and AF quality. Over the past year of PC gaming I've become very concious of image quality. If the 5900 can offer comparable quality (something which Nvidia has struggled with in the past) in *IN-GAME* scenarios at little expense to framerate, they may get a purchase out of me when comes time to replace my current card (though no way am I shelling out 400-500 clams for either company. Most I've spent on a card was 250 and that there is my limit.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most I've spent on a card was 250 and that there is my limit.

 

I spent $299 on my original Orchid Righteous 3D (Voodoo 1) card. I think that's the most I've dropped for a single card. I may have spent more on a pair of Voodoo 2's to run in SLI...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok...read the benchmarks and wow. It is the real deal -especially for DX 9.

 

The Doom Benchies are really cool to see. It's nice to see an econominical card like the ATI 9600 can run Doom at fairly decent resolutions (~50FPS). Turn down some settings (AA) and it ought to really move.

 

It's also interesting to see these $500 cards "only" hitting 70 to 100 FPS on the various Doom III benchies.

 

As good as the 5900 looks I'm still sticking to my recomendation to wait until around the time Doom is released. There will be more powerful cards released at that time. I can even see them released at lower prices as the Doom will initiate large quantity of sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You now, its easy to see that competition is fierce. In the past ATI has been known for inflating thier drivers to reach certain benchmarks and now it appears the Nvidia *maybe* guilty of the same thing with the 5900 Ultra and 3D mark 2003.

 

I just wish wish we could get uniform honesty here. With games like Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 on the horizon its going to be a difficult enough decision to select a graphics card, with benchmarks being cooked up its even worse. Now let me state here and now that I could give a good high rats ass about 3D mark 2003 because well, I think its a very overrated benchmarking tool. In the end I do not see this article as in anyway dismissing the Doom3 scores we saw earlier (as most are readily inclined to do for some oddball reason). Real world peformance is definitely the most important thing here. What bothers me is the possibility that Nvidia would even bother to cook up the 3D mark scores.

 

Heres the article in question (This article has been confirmed at two other well known sites as well). This could of course be a simple drive irregularity as Nvidia claims and lord knows I'm open to that possibility but its definitely interesting reading:

 

 

 

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973...,1086857,00.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was debating getting a Radeon 9800 256MB version, until I saw these benchmarks.

 

But nonetheless, I'm going to wait until DOom3 is on the shelves before I pick up a new video card. At that point, I'll buy whatever card is out that plays Doom3 (or Half-Life 2) the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

who doesn't optimize their drivers for benchmarks

 

Sure, but what concerns me is when those benchmarks are used as a water mark for real world performance (as they are in many a review). If I read a review/preview for a card that includes benchmarks on a graphics card I want be at least decently certain that what I read is the kind of performance I am going to be getting on my PC not some cooked up bullshit Nvidia or ATI "want" me to read.

 

Its just my opinion of course but the world of graphics cards, especially with these new power hungry games coming is unfortunately a lot more complicated then just plugging the card in and playing :cry:. (though I do agree Kelley, I wish it were that simple!).

 

To quote a well known benchmark tag line..."Framerate is life" :lol:

 

I think it only pertains to 3DMark2003 scores, and not to anything else

 

Thats the exact same article I posted a page back Chris :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ill wait for it on x-box There is no way im spending $500 on a graphic card to play any games

 

Same here. Oh wait... I don't even have an XBOX :o

 

Neither did I until a fortnight ago, when I realised that the cost of the video card upgrade necessary to eventually play Halo on the PC when it deigns to come out would cost me more than an XBox anyway. My poor little PC is basically an internet browser and Mame device now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with admitting a mistake and correcting it? Personally I'm glad Nvidia's gotten their act back together. I was not relishing the idea of holding my nose and installing a Radeon.

 

Just for the record I replaced my older Nvidia card with a Radeon 9500 PRo and it's been good to me. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...