First GFX Benchmarks Released

It was only a matter of time before the benchmark wars between nVidia's GeForce FX and ATI's Radeon 9700 PRO would begin. The only reason that held some sort of truce between the two graphics rivals was the fact that no one could get their hands on a GFX based board.

According to Maximum PC magazine's February issue the calm before the storm is officially over. The magazine claim to have had the pleasure of possessing, for a short while, a beta version of Alienware's upcoming GFX based board.
Initially, nVidia played coy and did not want to allow the magazine to publish any benchmarking results, claiming that the chip was a beta version and that the drivers were far from ready for high-powered tests. They finally accepted the publication of the results of a few tests at pre - approved benchmarks running at nVidia specified resolutions and settings. According to nVidia the final product, which is expected to retail in late February or March, will be far more refined than the version tested by Maximum PC.

Before we go into the numbers produced by the tests here is a little recap of what GeForce FX has to offer: pixel and vertex shaders that exceed the DirectX 9 specifications, 128-bit floating-point precision throughout the 3D pipeline, and support for DDR II memory.

Quake III
Quake III running at 1600x1200, 32-bit color and 2x anti-aliasing, GeForce FX proved to be 40 per cent faster than the ATI Radeon 9700 PRO at the same settings.

UT 2003
GFX was 20 per cent faster than ATI's 9700 PRO in the Unreal Tournament 2003 Asbestos fly-by demo at the above mentioned settings.

3D Mark 2001:SE
The suprise came from the 3DMark 2001:SE Game 4 benchmark, again at the same settings, at these settings, there the Radeon 9700 was 10 per cent faster than GeForce FX.

The detailed results are as follows:

GeForce FX

Quake3 Demo001, 1600x1200 2xAA: 209fps

UT 2003 Asbestos, 1600x1200 2xAA: 140fps

3DMark Game4, 1600x1200 2xAA: 41fps

Radeon 9700 Pro

Quake3 Demo001, 1600x1200 2xAA: 147fps

UT 2003 Asbestos, 1600x1200 2xAA: 119fps

3DMark Game4, 1600x1200 2xAA: 45fps

What these tests prove beyond doubt is that in most cases GFX will be quite a bit faster than the 9700 PRO. ATI will of course argue that their card was targeted at the High-End of the GF 4 market rather than the GFX but that will mean that they will have to dennounce their got there first claims and accept that they will have to wait until their next chip in order to compete with the GeForce FX.
nVidia on the other hand will also claim that memory bandwidth will not be an issue, as these tests hint, when the refined, retail product appears on store shelves and is accompanied by similarly improved drivers. They will also have to accept however, that the release of this product has been delayed enough for ATI to prepare their next generation chip, probably .13 and DDR II, which at the current rate may be announced before GFX reaches consumers.

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Comments

First GFX Benchmarks Released

......continued....."will be in stores next month, and we'd expect R350 in about a month following that. It will be a close race, but what ATI has going for them right now is a much more mature driver set than NVIDIA for their flagship GPU. The 3+ month advantage ATI had in bringing the R300 into production and to market gave ATI a much bigger advantage than just being the king of the hill for a while, it gave them quite a bit of time to fine-tune and optimize their drivers for this very occasion; this is a luxury that ATI has not had previously but they have made excellent use of it today.NVIDIA's focus at this point is NV31 and NV34, after all, that's where the money is. The small percentage of the market that will go after the NV30 will not make or break NVIDIA, but should ATI compete like this in other market segments then there will be cause for worry. As we mentioned at the start of our GeForce FX Preview - "Kudos to ATI."

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Everyone is wrong with the prices. The GeForce-FX will retail for $400 US just like the 9700pro.Wow. You can get a 9700pro much cheaper now and it beats the GF-FX in more than a few of the benchmarks. And when the GF-FX is better, it's barely better, like we prdeicted.Boom, boom, boom.Well, we don't hear much from NVidia fanboys anymore! And you should hear it!Two links: one AVI of GeForce FX 5800 ultra kicking from 2D to 3D mode:[url removed] an AVI of the sleek, quiet 9700pro in action:[url removed]

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Funny thing. Most analysts that were not in Nvidia's camp, predicted this very same outcome. When you take a look at both cards specs and features. They differed only slightly. Clock speed and memory modules being the only major differences. Which is not much of a advantage for the 5800 Ultra as Nvidia stuck with a 128 bit memeory interface. Huge mistake. As we can now see and how people predicted amoung other issues. And many Nvidia fan-boys did not find it strange that Nvidia would not let various hardware sites review the FX chip at higher resolutions with Fsaa and Ansioscopic filtering sampled before this review??? At that point you knew something was not koshar. Because you know Nvidia. When it's time to release a new product. Even to preview it. They have samples for all to test. This time around. Only a few got some. And before this, only 1 or 2 got to preview it. (on a limited basis and at quality settings Nvidia stated that would be acceptable) Bottom line. Nvidia got rivered. They sat on their collective asses when ATI said they had a product that would surpass the 4600ti and had a new set of drivers that were built from the ground up for this new chip-set that would be stable. Moreover, that it would be released in August of 2002. No one believed them. More so of Nvidia. And ATI came through on everything they said. And that screwed Nvidia as they were having problems releasing the NV30. And in doing so, cut corners in making the card. The 5800 Ultra is nothing more then a over-clocked card that produces insane amounts of heat and noise. Better have a 350watt power supply min. to run it. And keep your pets away from the back of the pc box. lol. Even when the drivers are tweaked for the 5800 and they get to increase the performance. Why the hell would you buy this oversized vaccum cleaner? For the price you can get a AIW9700Pro. And to make matters worse for them. Ati is going to release the R350 around the same time as the release of the 5800 Ultra. (Smar

First GFX Benchmarks Released

....(smart money says they will release it then) And the R350 will be using DDR2 memory and run at a higher clock speed. Which does not require a over-sized dirt devil vacum to cool it. And will be on a 256bit memory interface. Nvidia got rivered this time around. Plain and simple. They under-estimated ATI and got screwed. This battle is far from over. And the days of Nvidia releasing a card right after ATI to trump it are long gone. This war has been raised to a new level. Which bodes well for all of us consumers. One thing for sure though. The P.R. Department for Nvidia is top-notch. They B.S'D thier way all through the development of this card. Making Nvidiots wait for the "9700pro killer" and released lies of how the card would produce 22,000 scores in 3D Maarks. LMFAO. Boy many people are lemmings. They waited in vain and got screwed. Might as well wait a bit longer for the R350 or NV35. As the 5800 ULTRA is a dude......

First GFX Benchmarks Released

can somone accully tell me the frame they got on there ATI 9700pro and the FX card?for DOOM3?b/c i got a geforce 3 64mb DDR and i'm getting 10fps on 1024x728 and 1 fps when i firemy comps a AMD Xp 2000+384mb ddr ram80gb harddriveand a 4x AGP sloti heard somone say they only got 15 asec on the lowest settings with doom3 on 640x400somthingif this is true then the ATI card is shit and not worth a pennyso can somone run a test for me since i don't have a Fx card or ATi card yet

First GFX Benchmarks Released

HARTMANI am Gunnery SergeantHartman, your SeniorDrill Instructor. From now on, you will speakonly when spoken to, and the first and lastwords out of your filthysewers will be "Sir!"Do you maggots understand that?RECRUITS(in unison)Sir, yes, sir!HARTMANBullshit! I can't hear you. Sound off like yougot apair.RECRUITS(louder)Sir, yes, sir!HARTMANIf you ladies leave my island, if you surviverecruittraining ... you will be a weapon, youwill be a minister of death,praying for war.But until that day you are pukes! You're thelowest form of life on Earth. You are not evenhuman f**king beings!You are nothing butunorganized grabasstic pieces of amphibianshit!Because I am hard, you will not like me. Butthe moreyou hate me, the more you willlearn. I am hard, but I am fair!There is noracial bigotry here! I do not look down onn****rs,kikes, wops or greasers. Here youare all equally worthless! And myorders areto weed out all non-hackers who do not packthe gearto serve in my beloved Corps! Doyou maggots understand that?RECRUITS(in unison)Sir, yes, sir!HARTMANBullshit! I can't hear you!RECRUITS(louder)Sir, yes, sir!

First GFX Benchmarks Released

First off. The alpha version for Doom3 is not optimized for video cards. As for the 970Pro being shit. That would make the 5800 Ultra shit also as both cards are pulling in the same numbers almost. And in Doom3. In some tests. The 5800 Ultra is faster. And in others the 9700Pro is faster. If you have $500 to blow. Buy the 5800 Ultra and get ear plugs. For much less you can get the 9700Pro.

First GFX Benchmarks Released

1. The article here, and those benchmarks are BULLf**kINGSHIT. 2x AA on the GFX doesnt do shit, while on the ATI it makes tons of difference. Not a fair comparison at all.2. Nvidia CHOSE those benchmarks!!! only a retard would turst shit that nvidia chose themselves to be published!3. The geforceFX is the dumbest card ever, it steals one of your PCI slots, AND needs an extra power cable, AND sounds like a f**king vacuum cleaner!

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Moo: Ok, I can tell you that I don't get much of a framerate when shooting with the DOOM3 non-release PRE-ALPHA E3 presentation demo with my ATi 9700 pro card and I never will either, WITH ANY VIDEO CARD!!!As everyone should know, the game is not finished. That code was not written for anyone to play. Even if you have the fastest card ever built (which is a 9700pro, period) it doesn't mean squat when the code is unfinished.Wait until they finish programming the game and watch the 9700pro play it flawlessly at at least 1024x768 full resolution with everything turned all the way up.The ATi card is the best card, definately not shit and worth every single penny.

First GFX Benchmarks Released

The FX is a stupidly un-efficiant card, its got THE loudest cooling ive never heard on an expansion card and it uses 75watts of power. (9700 pro uses 45watts and you cant hear the cooling)ATI's cards are much better quality, if only they perfected the drivers.

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Did anyone notice that the test wasnt complete enough to really compare the cards? cause the ati 2xAA is slower but has better quality graphics. so if you do the with a 4xAA the ati 9700pro will win easily. The ati has got a better architecture (good for AA users) but on the other hand the geforce Fx is more powerful

First GFX Benchmarks Released

This is still just a beta tested card, so this doesn't prove anything. In the past Nvidia managed to up their score just by improving the driver needed for the card to work properly. I say that when this driver is finished, it will surely outperform the RADEON 9700!!!!!!!

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Hmm...This card seems good. I don't think it's going to be much different from the Radeon 9700 pro though. All I know is if this card is $500 or more I am going to get the Radeon 9700 Pro unless the GeforceFX can almost double the graphics potential of the Radeon 9700 Pro.

First GFX Benchmarks Released

This should be good when it comes out.As for speculations on the 3d mark result, read the article at[url removed] does this suggest? That the GeForce FX is very fast -- particularly when memory bandwidth isn’t an issue. 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."Also check out the beta card pic, its super chunky !

First GFX Benchmarks Released

omg.. you seem brainwashed or something! i mean GFX was produced with one purpose: to defeat Radeon 9700, and i can't say that the results a overwhelming! nVidia are about to get their little lemon-colored butts kicked by rebelious ATI.. hehe, btw. i own a Radeon 8500 ;) i do like the competetion, so it's lnot that i would want nVidia to loose or something.. i just want cheaper, and better graphic cards..

First GFX Benchmarks Released

"ME" you are so stupid.Can't u understand thet FX is the NVIDIA's final product.And it is using ddr 2 but the Radeon9700pro is using ddr1 so guess why it is better.U will see that when ATI's say there final word when release their new product NVIDIA will suffer the pain.ATI's is everytime one step further.For the drivers fordirectx9.So shut up and wait till FX is released and ATI's new product is released.:(

First GFX Benchmarks Released

all you bitches bitch to much... go ati - go nvidia, your all d**ks.understand this, gfx is going to be better, then ati will be better - its all competition. but nvidia hold the upper hand, if companies start to addopt the new cg language the gfx will be majorly superior to ati, but thats not to say that ati will lack in performance and graphic detail, but will have a slight disadvantage in cinematic qualitycompetition is good, and im sick and tired of all your friggin ati pussy's and nvidia d**ks standing up for your "favourite" card maker - look at results, not just the name

First GFX Benchmarks Released

All of yell are bithing who is better and what card is faster than the other one... The GeForce FX sounds like it would be a good card but will it do what nVidia claims to do... Toy Story graphics, yell I like to see this... If what nVidia claims is true then the card will be worth the wait but I not think what nVidia claims are true... nVidia said that sense the GF3 and the GF4 but I dont see it... I think the card would be faster then the Radeon9700 Pro, but I seen in a magazine that there is a Radeon 10000 Pro coming out... And I heard that the GeForce FX Ultra 5800 is going to be around 500 dallors... I dont know about all of yall out there but nVidia is crazy to price the card that high when there is going to be other card out faster 3 to 6 month later by nVidia like saying the GeForce FX 6000 or 6200 or so on... I think it should be 300 to 400 dallors like the cards now not jack the price everytime they make a new card... I like to but a Radeon10000 Pro or a GeForce FX Ultra 5800 but I wait and see... because cards are not

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Who cares? ATI bring out the fastest card, then NVidia bring out the fastest card, then guess what? ATI bring out the fastest card, then NVidia bring out the fastest card. Then all the slower cards come down in price, and people who have more than one brain cell buy them :)

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Butters or butt head should i say you should really know what your talking about. Ati does not have the uper hand, nvidia has 71% of the market today vs ati 26%. By the time the R350 comes out the geforce fx will be just as fast if not faster with new drivers. Last but not least the 9700 isn't the fastest card the Geforce FX is

First GFX Benchmarks Released

Very fast card indeed. However i won't spend that type of money and get rid of my 9700 with those early results......only 20% faster in Unreal2003??? not enough. 40% in Quake3? Who cares. Because once you go beyond 80 FPS. It does not matter. With a 9700 your running Quake3 in the high 100's for frames per second. FX has to double performance across the board for me to change. "The GeForce FX’s core graphics processor is much faster than the Radeon 9700’s, so it will be able to draw as many polygons and fill as many pixels as will fit across the memory pipeline. Our hunch is that turning on 4x anti-aliasing at 1600x1200 would diminish the GeForce’s performance lead over the Radeon, or maybe even nix it entirely. But that’s just a guess based on the scores we achieved, and the fact that nVidia wouldn’t let us run anything that would stress the memory pipeline"If games are band-width hungery, The FX chip will fall behind. And with the revamped 9700pro running DDR2 and the same for the R350 being released around the same time as the FX chip. I will wait.

First GFX Benchmarks Released

I am not a stupid d**k to spend $500 on a god damn graphics card only to have slightly better performance than a $350 card or something. In the end, it's all about processing power. Watching these two (ATI and nVidia) go at it is like watching a wrestling match with neither one maintaining it's advantages over the other for a long time (although ATI seems to be doing it... but obviously not for long)It's so damn fun to watch them dipshit fan boys argue over this shit

First GFX Benchmarks Released

I cant believe some of the posts here.REDSAINT - pure idiot. what the hell u mean, built for one purpose, what the heck do you think ATI does. "hmmm, why bother making a card faster the 9700, lets be slower"...(idiot)and then there isANONYMOUS- "fridge, expensive, ugly". Are you an idiot! What you think the 9700pro runs cool, you think its cheap?! Man.Its funny, the 9700 comes out and beats the 4600 by about 20-35%. Everyone goes NUTS. Now, nvidia is going to beat the 9700 by (how knows really?) 30-50%. Everyone now flames. Biased a little people?

Pages

Add new comment