|
For
testing purposes, the card was put against an FX5900,
this will show the difference in the upper end and
the mainstream performance that nVidia has to offer.
It will also show the performance gains, if any, from
overclocking. I do not have an ATi card here for comparison,
although I would like to see how it compares against
a 9600, but I will do what I can with the tools available.
The
testbed consists of:
Chaintech
7NJS Zenith nForce2 Motherboard
Athlon XP 2700+ 333FSB CPU
512 MB XtremeDDR 400True PC3500
Thermaltake 420W PSU
Chaintech
AA5700U FX5700Ultra graphics card
Inno3D FX5900 Tornado graphics card
For
these tests, I did not overclock any of the base components.
The only time I O/C'd anything was during the testing
of the AA5700U where noted. CPU, RAM and FSB were
all at standard timings for all tests.
For
benchmarking I used the following tools:
Rightmark
D3D Bench
Shadermark v2.0
AquaMark3
Quake3 Arena
Unreal Tournament 2003
3D Mark 2001
3D Mark 2003
I’ll
start out with D3D Rightmark. I set up a wide range
of tests, and ran them at 1024x768, 85 Hz. These benchmarks
test independently, geometry, pixel shading and point
sprites. Results are in Frames Per Second (FPS) and
a higher score is better. There is quite a bit of
information in the results so just follow the links
below to view the full breakdown.
Sorry
about the manual comparison, I will work out a better
way of extracting and graphing the relevant information
in future reviews...
Next
I’ll test the PS2.0 performance with ShaderMark v2.0.
There has been some disappointment and contraversy
in this area of the FX line, let’s see if the new
drivers and the latest build of the 5700U core are
any better than when the FX line was launched.
As
you can see, neither card was able to render all of
the shaders. And you can also see that the 5700U is
having a heck of a time keeping up with the 5900,
to the tune of 50% lower in many cases. I wouldn't
expect to see such a massive difference between the
top end and the midrange, especially when the 5700U
has much faster RAM (by 50MHz) and faser core speed
(by 75MHz) Of course pixel shaders are one of the
downfalls of the FX line, so the expectation was not
as high here in the first place.
And
to put it all together, I'll use AquaMark3 to show
overall performance in a synthetic benchmark
Well,
not as powerful as the 5900, the 5700U shows solid
enough performance for a mid-range card. There is
really only a 25% or so difference between the two.
It only really shows considerable weakness with large
scale vegitation and high particle counts. Otherwise,
for the positioning of this card, it holds its own.
With
the true geek stuff behind us, let's move on to real
world gaming performance... Again, just follow the
link at the bottom of the page
|
