Geforce FX 5600 faster than 5900???

[doa_master]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/hl2_4.html

:rolling:

 

[Gaemon82]

Do you really think a benchmark based on an Alpha leak is reliable?!?!

 

[thehunter1320]

yes

 

[Grif]

ROLFMAO!!!
Jeeee, some people even complain that the so called "beta game" has bugs. Man, where the hell do the come up with such a nonsence

 

[D33]

Originally posted by Grif
ROLFMAO!!!
Jeeee, some people even complain that the so called "beta game" has bugs. Man, where the hell do the come up with such a nonsence

I must admit it's quite amusing. Moved to hardware board.

 

[LoneDeranger]

This just confirms my suspicion that nVidia cards suck.

 

[Woggy]

yes

Man this forum is filled with dipshits

 

[livingsacrifice]

Thats bullcrap, I have a 5600 ultra and it does no where that good on those levels.

 

[Woggy]

Think: Different system.

CPU: AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (2.20GHz, 400MHz FSB, 512KB of L2);
Mainboard: ABIT NF7-S v2.0;
RAM: Corsair XMS PC3200 512MB (2x256MB, 2-3-3-6);
HDD: Maxtor DiamondMax Plus D740X (2MB buffer);
Audio: NVIDIA MCP-T;
Software: Microsoft Windows XP SP1, DirectX 9.0b;
Drivers: officially released WHQL drivers from various vendors.

Do you have a 3200+?
Do you have 1GB of high performance Corsair PC3200 ram?
Do you have the same motherboard?

 

[Arno]

I have an FX5600, but the fact that it outperforms an FX5900 in this test just shows how unreliable the test is. The reviewers didn't even mention what drivers they used and since that leaked test is not available through legal channels, the numbers can't be verified. What a pointless waste of time.

 

[dawdler]

Bah! Cant trust the scores anyway. Here's a new update on the "awesome" and non-cheating-compared-to-51.75-crap-drivers:

Finally, let's draw the conclusion of everything we found out in this article. First of all, let's have a look at the discovered "optimizations" of the Detonator 45.23 and 52.10/14, but only related to the GeForceFX series.

The Detonator 45.23 shows an exemplary filter quality for both OpenGL and Direct3D. However, an application specific "optimization" has been found for Unreal Tournament 2003, which can be deactivated by using the Application mode.

The Detonators 52.10 and 52.14 instead are showing us a lot of "optimizations" for Direct3D filtering, but seemingly neither an application specific "optimization" nor an "optimization" for OpenGL. You could say that in Direct3D, generally all texture stages are filtered by this faked trilinear filter, regardless of the filter setting forced by the control panel or by using the Application mode. In addition to that, there is another "optimization" when using the Control panel mode (not the Application mode), where the texture stages 1 till 7 are only filtered with a 2x anisotropic filter at the best.

And I love this one:

Other than the Detonator 51.75, the Detonator 52.10 and 52.14 differ in so far as that the faked trilinear filter is also used for the texture stage 0 (which usually is the basis texture). That’s why both new Detonators are more "optimized" than the 51.75!

http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/detonator_52.14/index_e.php

 

[Asus]

The 5600/5200 probably revert to PS1.4 instead of PS2.0 in some cases.
I read something about this...ill look it up.

found it.
LINK