![[H]ardOCP](/images/blank.gif){kind=small}
- Date:
- Thursday , March 13, 2003
- Author:
- Sean Pelletier
- Editor:
- Kyle Bennett
- Google +1
GeForceFX 5200 & 5600
Apples to apples performance benchmarking with the new GFFX 5200 and 5600. We also show you how NVIDIA is doing things differently and if they are really selling a "cinematic" experience or not.
Be advised that this first page is a repost of the article we published last week. We did this to make sure we did not leave out any critical infomration on the GFFX line. Some of you will obviously want to skip ahead.
Introduction
With the recent release of DirectX9 acting as a brief indication of what’s to come, we see a whole new world on the horizon. The advent of next-generation games such as Doom ]I[ promise to bring a new sense of realism to the graphics front. Utilizing a number of dramatic new features and technology, these games will be able to create some of the most incredible environments ever seen on a monitor. However, as one might imagine these lush graphics will come at a great cost. For months, NVIDIA asked us, “Are you ready?”. The fact of the matter is, many of us would have to answer, “No”. Even those gaming with a relatively high-end system will be depressed when they see the frame-rates for the next-generation games. As such, it looks as though an upgrade or two is in order for many should they want to retain respectable frame-rates. For the most part, the term “upgrade” is synonymous with “expensive” when dealing with the PC industry. Fortunately, it appears as though the graphics card market will have a few exceptions this year.
In the past, the graphics world was relatively simple as most graphics cards took a “brute force” approach to rendering scenes. The most expensive models would have the highest clocks and thus, the highest performance. Less-expensive models had a great deal of trouble as they were using much lower frequencies. Today’s situation paints a slightly different picture and is much more complex. On top of raw processing power, current and upcoming graphics chipsets must also focus on the support for new features and methods used by developers. Since the release of Microsoft’s DX8, developers have had the opportunity to take a few different approaches to rendering a realistic image through the use of programmable graphics hardware. Unfortunately, the syntax was a bit too cryptic and lengthy for games and developers to fully adopt the approach. The HLSL ( High Level Shading Language ) of Microsoft’s new DX9 now provides these developers with a fast and effective means of implementing these shaders. As a result, the leading graphics card vendors have begun focusing their attention on the support of these features throughout their product lines as they offer unlimited potential. Unlike the enormous delay for DX8-compliant games ( which still have yet to appear in any large quantity ), the number of available DX9 titles should quickly grow once the first “core” game engines become established.
As more advanced games become available, the lack for hardware support for the games DX9 features will have a profound impact upon the look and performance of gameplay. With the most popular titles such as Doom ]I[, coincidentally being the most demanding, there will likely be a boom in the industry as consumers frantically struggle to replace their aging hardware in an effort to achieve even playable frame-rates. As expected, the focus of many upgrades will be on the graphics card itself. Though some will elect to sell a kidney or two and accept nothing but the flagship $400 model, many will be left wondering how much they need to spend without going overboard. Fortunately, NVIDIA has just announced a few models in the GeForce FX family which will likely shed some light on this subject.
The GeForce FX Family of GPU's
As one might have guessed, each GPU is based upon the original GeForce FX architecture, whose features can be referenced in our initial GeForce FX Preview. Obviously, a number of features have been altered or removed to accommodate each price range.
However, the CineFX engine remains present in each model. From the flagship GeForce FX 5800 series to the $99 GeForce FX 5200, you will find support for DX9 Pixel and Vertex Shaders 2.0. As we discussed earlier, the support for these features is imperative for their longevity in a system. By having this functionality, you can be sure that you will be able to purchase a next generation game and play it the way it was meant to be played.
Looking at the feature chart listed above, we see that the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra shares a number of features with the GeForce FX 5800 series. In addition, we also see the most dramatic differences between the two. Here, we find that the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra uses traditional DDR memory instead of the faster ( and more expensive ) DDR II solution. In addition, the number of pipelines has been reduced to 4 versus the 8 pipelines of the GeForce FX 5800 series ( in specific environments ).
Viewing the remainder of the chart, we are shown that the GeForce FX 5200 series is built using the more conventional .15 micron process. In addition, we find that Intellisample Technology has been omitted for the GeForce FX 5200 series. From an image quality standpoint, this should come as no surprise. Lacking the fill-rate to support the higher 6xS and 8xS FSAA settings, it would make little sense to incorporate this feature. However, some more exotic image quality aspects end up missing in the end. Unfortunately, the loss-less color compression methods and Dynamic Gamma Correction seen in the other models have been done away with. Regardless, the GPU still has an impressive list of features especially considering its price.
| 5800 Ultra | 5600 Ultra | 5200 Ultra |
Graphics Core: | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Memory Bandwidth: | 16GB/sec | 11.2GB/sec | 10.4GB/sec |
Fillrate: | 4B Texel/sec | 1.4B Texel/sec | 1.3B Texel/sec |
Vertices/sec: | 200M/sec | 88M/sec | 81M/sec |
Max Mem: | 128MB | 256MB | 128MB |
Referencing this chart, we begin to see the main difference between the product lines. One characteristic which certainly captures your attention is the enormous fill-rate advantage the GeForce FX 5800 Ultra has upon the rest of the GeForce FX family of GPU's. The additional horsepower of the flagship GPU allows it to handle more than double the amount of vertices per second than the mainstream graphics chipsets. Regardless, this is to be expected when comparing a $400 card to sub-$200 mainstream cards. Overall, we are still looking at some serious power behind these new cost effective GPU's which should result in some impressive frame-rates across the board.
Board Layout
For those who are very detail-oriented, you might realize that the board layout of these graphics cards is completely different from the layout for the GeForce FX 5800 Ultra we saw. Aside from the GeForce FX 5800 series, the GeForce FX family of GPU's all share the same PCB board. As you can imagine, the lower clock speeds and component choices did not necessitate all the features of the flagship card's PCB. Therefore, NVIDIA engineers managed to reduce the overall production costs for these models. To further reduce costs, the GPU's do not use the flip-chip packaging found on the GeForce FX 5800 series. Again, the benefits of the new packaging did not outweigh the additional cost for this specific price-point.
Though there are some differences between boards, the auxiliary Molex power connector managed to find its way onto nearly every model. As system components continue to draw more power and wrestle for wattage, it is imperative that the GPU receive a clean and consistent input in order to have a stable system. Should one compare the GeForce FX 5800 Ultra with any of the GeForce FX models shown here, you would notice one glaring difference between the two. By having lower operating frequencies ( and thus less heat ), the GeForce FX 5600 and 5200 series do not have to resort to exotic cooling methods and the notorious Flow FX copper heatsink assembly is replaced by a thin-profile aluminum cooler. As a result, the card only requires one slot and does not inhibit any neighboring PCI slots.
Both engineering sample cards came stock with 128MB worth of Hynix BGA 400MHz DDR memory. This is more of a null issue as graphics card vendors will use a variety of different memory modules depending upon cost and application. It should be noted that the "vanilla" GeForce FX 5200 does not use BGA memory, and runs cool enough to use a silent passive heatsink assembly.
GeForce FX 5600 Ultra
With a suggested price of roughly $199, the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra may be one of the most highly-anticipated graphics cards this quarter. Despite the more budget-oriented price, this graphics card promises anything but budget performance. This model will be offered with a core frequency of 350MHz and preliminary testing has shown a fair amount of headroom beyond this value. Should this engineering sample be any indication, it looks as though the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra could follow in the footsteps of the popular overclocking phenomenon GeForce4 Ti4200.
GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
Targeting a retail price of only $149, the GeForce FX 5200 Ultra looks to be an incredible combination of price and performance. With the sample we received being clocked with a core frequency of 325MHz and a memory frequency of 650MHz, the GeForce FX 5200 Ultra was sure to offer some excellent performance considering its cost.
One factor to consider here is the $50 price differential between this card and the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra. I was eager to see whether the latter's additional features would warrant the additional cost for most gamers. Regardless, both cards offer full DX9 support and are quite impressive in their own right.
GeForce FX 5200
At this time, little is known about the "vanilla" GeForce FX 5200. However, a quick comparison of this card to its siblings reveals some dramatic differences. In addition to the lack of BGA memory, this model utilizes a passive heatsink assembly for cooling. Furthermore, the card sports a barren PCB board which is unlike any of the other cards. Despite the meager appearance, this card is still based upon the GeForce FX architecture and comes complete with full DX9 support. This is quite a feat when you consider the fact that versions of this card should retail for as little as $79!