GeForce FX Benchmarks Revealed!

~~David~~ · Jan 4, 2003, 07:47 PM

Guy’s over at Maximum PC have gotten their hands on a GeforceFX and through some benchmarks at it. Though I found this part very interesting and quite deceiving.

"Of course, the GeForceFX card that came inside our Alienware prototype system was just as “beta” as the rest of the system. With early drivers and freshly fabbed silicon, the card we tested isn’t quite what you’ll find in stores when the card ships in February or March. In fact, the board and its drivers were so unpolished, nVidia initially refused to let us benchmark it at all, and relented only when we agreed to limit our tests to pre-approved benchmarks running at stipulated resolutions and AA settings".

Read the full article HERE

DownTime · Jan 4, 2003, 07:55 PM

I dont know... i mean, 128it bus? Like the article said, anything over 2xAA and the card will choke.

Lets see when everything is finalized, how this card will do.

Zardon · Jan 4, 2003, 08:13 PM

Quote:

In Quake III running at 1600x1200, 32-bit color and 2x anti-aliasing, the GeForce FX is about 40 percent faster than the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro at the same settings. The GeForce is almost 20 percent faster than the 9700 Pro in the Unreal Tournament 2003 Asbestos fly-by demo at these same settings.

JavaFox · Jan 4, 2003, 08:39 PM

Typical of print media to acquiesce just for exclusitivity. I mean, it's exciting to HAVE benchmarks of the product out already, but it kind of undermines reviewers when they have to stipulate to certain approved benchmarks, resolutions, and settings.

RIV@NVX · Jan 4, 2003, 08:39 PM

40%??? Oh, this thing is seriously fast!

Does history repeat or just me sees things this way?
*cough*VooDoo5*cough*GeForce*cough*slower, but better and winner - hmmm...

DownTime · Jan 4, 2003, 08:50 PM

Quote:

However, in the 3DMark 2001:SE Game 4 benchmark at these settings, the Radeon 9700 is about 10 percent faster than the GeForce FX.

What does this suggest? That the GeForce FX is very fast -- particularly when memory bandwidth isn’t an issue.

Bandwidth will become more needy when you go for higher AA and AF. This is where the FX will choke...

Quote:

turning on 4x anti-aliasing at 1600x1200 would diminish the GeForce’s performance lead over the Radeon, or maybe even nix it entirely.

See... this is NOT good for their best card to be. Especially when its going to be way over priced.

Quote:

Remember that the GeForce FX’s 128-bit memory bus runs at 500MHz, but has a maximum bandwidth of just 16GB/sec. Meanwhile, the Radeon 9700’s 256-bit memory interface accommodates 19.8GB/sec, even though it runs at just 325MHz.

Again, Nvidias choice to use 128bit bus is a HUGE mistake. ATi has almost 50% less clock speed, but pushs out more bandwidth. If they just boost their clock speed alone to 500mzh, it be all over the FX like a fat kid on a smartie. This huge debate about the R350, if it ever comes out, it will own nvidia if ATi doesnt drop the ball.

Again, these are just going by the numbers that are given. These could be false. Only time will tell... and at this point. Nvidia aint in no rush.

Bambers · Jan 4, 2003, 11:22 PM

Memory bus is the reason for 9700pro being 10% ahead in nature. Even on my 8500 that test is almost completly memory bandwidth limited.

It would be interesting to see the FX on the outdoor Ut2k3 levels with some foliage as that would be heavier on the memory than the rather simple (by ut2k3 standard) indoor asbestos. 4x/higherAA and AF would also be intersting to see.

Alistair · Jan 5, 2003, 02:08 AM

w00t it makes games that are already too fast for us to notice any difference in even faster, that sure sounds like its worth $500 to me!

damanez · Jan 5, 2003, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alistair
w00t it makes games that are already too fast for us to notice any difference in even faster, that sure sounds like its worth $500 to me!

lol, NO Video card is worth $500 to me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jcastill · Jan 5, 2003, 05:27 AM

Well, I'm not impressed with the benchmarks, be honest here, the 9700 has been on the market for what? almost 6 months. And really, I love Image Quality, and I know the card will not be able to keep in high AF and FSAA levels as good as the 9700.

I really hate this, come on the 9700 PRO is a overclocking god; and I don't think the GeFX will be that overclockeable, so who knows, maybe the GeFX will take 2nd place in 3dmarks and leave the 9700 in first place. But who knows, still to early to know.

DriveEuro · Jan 5, 2003, 06:51 PM

I wasn't impressed either....I'd still pick up a 150$ less Radeon 9700Pro.....or even the 9700nonpro

Dom · Jan 6, 2003, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DriveEuro
I wasn't impressed either....I'd still pick up a 150$ less Radeon 9700Pro.....or even the 9700nonpro

Hopefully that was just benchmarks of the '4200' version of the FX.

Jan 4, 2003, 07:47 PM	#1
~~David~~ Banned Join Date: May 2002 Location: Atlanta Posts: 959 Rep Power: 0	GeForce FX Benchmarks Revealed! Guy’s over at Maximum PC have gotten their hands on a GeforceFX and through some benchmarks at it. Though I found this part very interesting and quite deceiving. "Of course, the GeForceFX card that came inside our Alienware prototype system was just as “beta” as the rest of the system. With early drivers and freshly fabbed silicon, the card we tested isn’t quite what you’ll find in stores when the card ships in February or March. In fact, the board and its drivers were so unpolished, nVidia initially refused to let us benchmark it at all, and relented only when we agreed to limit our tests to pre-approved benchmarks running at stipulated resolutions and AA settings". Read the full article HERE

Jan 4, 2003, 08:39 PM	#5
RIV@NVX Freedom is a feature. Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Croatia, Rijeka Posts: 4,476 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	40%??? Oh, this thing is seriously fast! Does history repeat or just me sees things this way? coughVooDoo5coughGeForcecoughslower, but better and winner - hmmm... __________________ -- Vedran Last edited by RIV@NVX; Jan 4, 2003 at 09:36 PM.

Jan 5, 2003, 02:08 AM	#8
Alistair Spoos Join Date: May 2002 Location: State College, PA, USA Posts: 435 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	w00t it makes games that are already too fast for us to notice any difference in even faster, that sure sounds like its worth $500 to me! __________________ - Alistair

Jan 5, 2003, 06:51 PM	#11
DriveEuro HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Gurnee Illinois Posts: 4,677 Rep Power: 0	I wasn't impressed either....I'd still pick up a 150$ less Radeon 9700Pro.....or even the 9700nonpro __________________ [color=orange]ASUS P4P800 Deluxe [color=black]-[/color] 2.4C --> 3300mhz [color=black]-[/color] Mushkin PC3200 at 220 5-2-2-2 (cpu limited) [color=black]-[/color] BBAti 9800Pro at 430/375 [/color] [color=black]3[/color][color=gray]D[/color]M[color=black]a[/color][color=gray]r[/color]k[color=yellow]01[/color] [color=black]3[/color][color=gray]D[/color]M[color=black]a[/color][color=gray]r[/color]k[color=yellow]03[/color] 16001200 12801024

Jan 4, 2003, 07:55 PM	#2
DownTime DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 29 Rep Power: 0	I dont know... i mean, 128it bus? Like the article said, anything over 2xAA and the card will choke. Lets see when everything is finalized, how this card will do.

Jan 4, 2003, 08:39 PM	#4
JavaFox E Pluribus Unum Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,203 Rep Power: 0	Typical of print media to acquiesce just for exclusitivity. I mean, it's exciting to HAVE benchmarks of the product out already, but it kind of undermines reviewers when they have to stipulate to certain approved benchmarks, resolutions, and settings.

Jan 4, 2003, 11:22 PM	#7
Bambers DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 25 Rep Power: 0	Memory bus is the reason for 9700pro being 10% ahead in nature. Even on my 8500 that test is almost completly memory bandwidth limited. It would be interesting to see the FX on the outdoor Ut2k3 levels with some foliage as that would be heavier on the memory than the rather simple (by ut2k3 standard) indoor asbestos. 4x/higherAA and AF would also be intersting to see.

Jan 5, 2003, 05:27 AM	#10
jcastill Mexico Man! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Mexico Posts: 87 Rep Power: 0	Well, I'm not impressed with the benchmarks, be honest here, the 9700 has been on the market for what? almost 6 months. And really, I love Image Quality, and I know the card will not be able to keep in high AF and FSAA levels as good as the 9700. I really hate this, come on the 9700 PRO is a overclocking god; and I don't think the GeFX will be that overclockeable, so who knows, maybe the GeFX will take 2nd place in 3dmarks and leave the 9700 in first place. But who knows, still to early to know.