XFX Geforce FX 5600XT

arifmanzoor

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2002
46
0
18,530
Hi! Anybody here can tell me that how is this card,
(XFX GeForce FX 5900XT Video Card, 128MB DDR, 256-bit, DVI/TV-Out, 8X AGP)

I wana know different things about this card like:

1)How this card Performs.
2)Is it a Nice Card for the Cost (197$).
3)Will it last for an year.
4)Is it better than ATi or Should i buyt some ATi Card
5)How much i can O/C this Graphic Card.
 

cleeve

Illustrious
The GeforceFX 5900XT is the best card in it's price range right now. It performs better than the Radeon 9600XT in most applications. Which is pretty damn good.

Yes, it will definitely hold up well for at least a year.

It should overclock OK.

It's a bit better than the radeon 9600 XT but not as good as a Radeon 9800. The 9800 PRO/XT are much better. Then again, the 9800 is significantly more expensive.

So to summarixe, the 5900XT is the best card you can buy right now for about $200. The only exception I'd make to that is if you can find a Radeon 9700 PRO or Radeon 9800 for about $200, and I don't think you will.


(Note that you titled this thread 5600XT though, and the 5600 sucks. But there's no 5600XT, so I assume you actually meant 5900XT)

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>
 

petrolhead2003

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2003
99
0
18,630
Definately get the 5900xt.
In SOME tests it can even beat a 9800xt!!

Here's a test:-
http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/112/14/

It'll absolutely slaughter a 5600 and in some test's is >40% faster than a 9600xt.

Also look at comparisons as seen in thg's vga charts III.

You really must look at this chart,all the info that you want is there.

______________________________________________________

It's easy to overclock these cards and there's plenty of leway to get it upto normal 5900 settings.
I've got a Leadtek model and i've had it upto 450/900 no problem,mines got no heatsinks on the ram,so that'll be sorted soon and with some better ventilation,maybe it'll hit 5950 levels.



<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by petrolhead2003 on 01/17/04 06:19 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

GeneticWeapon

Splendid
Jan 13, 2003
5,795
0
25,780
You posted a single link to to a Serious Sam OpenGL benchmark, that would run on DX6 class hardware, done by an nVidia biased, moronic website.
Please leave our forum.

<b>I help because you suck</b>
 

cleeve

Illustrious
In SOME tests it can even beat a 9800xt!!

Yes, and in SOME tests it gets beaten by a lowly 9600 PRO! (i.e. shadermark)

Framerates don't always tell the whole story. This fellow is looking for longevity as well, and the 9600XT's shaders are more powerful than the 5900XT's. Plain and simple.

Plus, the 9600XT has a much better antialiassing implementation.

The 5900XT is a better card, to be sure... but it's far from a no-contest.



________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>
 

pauldh

Illustrious
Yup, he is back. Ever since getting ripped talking about HL2, he is on a quest to convince the world of NVidia's supremecy.

More importantly though, the 5900XT (SE) is a very nice card, but I agree and would take a 9800 (np) or a 9700Pro if I could find one for that price. Unfortunately those $200 9800's seem to be long gone at Circuit City.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt
 

petrolhead2003

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2003
99
0
18,630
Oh how quickly it boils down to Ati v's Nvidia.

If it's a better card ,why argue?

On other matters:-

I'm not really bothered about the hl2 test's,Valve will have to sort it out or loose a huge propotion of their sales.This could do huge damage to their franchise.

I don't think Nvidia are great at everything,they messed up making their cards with 16/32 bit precision shaders,they should have stuck to the dx9 spec like Ati,rather than going beyond it.

And i only got my 5900lx because it was half price special offer,i would probably have got a 9600xt otherwise.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by petrolhead2003 on 01/16/04 04:58 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

pauldh

Illustrious
To answer you directly. Yes it is a nice card and will last you. You can feel good about purchasing a 5900XT right now if $200 is within your price range. As far as should you buy an ATI Radeon 9600 XT instead? Well that depends on whether you prefer ATI or NVidia, if you want HL2 or Call of Duty, or if saving $30+ dollars means anything to you. As far as lasting, I doubt there is any more "LIFE" in a 5900XT than in a 9600XT. ie, both cards will last you the same amount of time before you will NEED to upgrade.

I personally prefer ATI. I own Call of Duty (great game). I don't own a Half Life 2 Coupon yet and I do want HL2 when it is released. So I would save $30+ dollars and buy the Radeon 9600XT and get a HalfLife 2 coupon.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt
 

pauldh

Illustrious
Well that sounds a bit better. Just don't value one particular benchmark too high unless it happens to be an actual game that you want to play. Example: In C&C generals benchmark done for Toms VGA Charts III, The Radeon 9600 non-pro beats out every NVidia Card including th FX5900XT and FX5950U. Shoot, even the Radeon 8500 and 9000 Pro beat out the FX5900XT in that test. But showing a link to that one benchmark and saying that the 9000 pro is a strong card, even beating out the FX5900XT in some tests, I'd be misleading the innocent and be made fun of by the knowledgable. And yes, I understand that I am exagerating as the FX5900XT that you spoke about is a fast card worthy of praise and a 9000pro isn't. But just trying to make a little obvious point.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt
 

pauldh

Illustrious
"I'm not really bothered about the hl2 test's,Valve will have to sort it out or loose a huge propotion of their sales.This could do huge damage to their franchise"

Yes but remember, those poor NVidia/HL2 results WERE NVidias fault not Valve's fault. Valve has been working very hard on getting their game to run well on NVidia hardware. (5 times the time spent on those optimizations than on generic DX9 that the ATI uses.) But it takes alot more work than on ATI Hardware. NVidia's drivers were so weak for DX9.0 that Valve couldn't really do much more about it. I agree, HL2 better run on NVidia's or many folks will be ticked. But if by some chance it didn't NVidia will take as big a knock as Valve.

Yes, I'll stop talking HL2 now as all we can do is wait and see.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt
 
The FX5600XT SUCKS (and <b>Cleeve</b>, <A HREF="http://tcs24.co.uk/tcs/product_info.php/products_id/166" target="_new">yes it does exist</A>).

The FX5900XT is OK, it is usually availible for a great price/performance point. It's better than the R9600PRO/XT and the FX5700U, but often at a Small premium. If you are gaming, especially at higher resolutions, it will make a significant difference though and is usually worth the small $ diff from others in the area. Although if you can get an ATI R9800 for that same price (some have been availible for $199US), then that would be a better choice still IMO. You should be able to overclock it ok. There are some people out there who have been able to overclock some to very high levels but they have had much faster memory than the average (<A HREF="http://www.monkeyreview.com/reviews/review.php?num=290" target="_new">Here's a review of the FX5900PV</A> by Monkey Review which has the RARE Hynix 2.2ns memory [most are 2.5/2.8/2.86 to save money]).

All of those cards will last a year (except of course the FX5600XT), but they will not be as good as the mid-range cards of the new year IMO. The RV380 as an a example is supposed to have R9800 level performance as the mid-range replacement (and likely some nice technical upgrades). I'm sure nV will come out with a similar product.

Will this card play most of (if not all) of the games of 2004, yes most likely at good resolution levels and allowing you many features.

The easiest way to put it IMO is Get whichever of the follwoing you can find for the same price (starting from best to worst);

R9800
FX5900
FX5900xt/se/lx/esp/pv/ls/etc..
R9600XT/FX5700U (dependant more on what games you like)
R9600Pro
(then)
FX5600Ultra Revision 2 (flip-chip)
FX5600Ultra Revision 1

But I wouldn't recommend either of the FX5600Us as they just don't perform well enough to be in anyway considered prepared for future titles.

Hope that helps.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil:
 
[H], nVnews, Xbit, Digit-Life, and a few others have tried that mod to no success. It's success rate is obviously below that of the R9800SE.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK :evil:
 

cleeve

Illustrious
Whose boiling it down to Ati VS Nvidia? I said the R3xx shaders are better than the FX shaders. That makes me biased?

Why argue? Because <b>you're</b> biased, and I enjoy it.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>2600+</b></font color=red> <i>(o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b></font color=red>