[H]OCP does the FX5600 & FX5200 Ultras

[martrox]

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDQ0

What can I say, by far the best review of these cards I've seen. Kudos to Brent - I really meant Sean!

Although NVIDIA has taken two steps forward in terms of features and functionality, they have seemingly taken a step backwards for both image quality and performance. As we score things, that would make NVIDIA's current position stagnant at best. Should the "cinematic computing era" be taking place, it is happening with ATI's product line, as we have seen first hand that the current GeForceFX product line simply cannot compete with ATI products released last year.

EDIT: ACK! It was Sean...... My mistake! Just figured that since Brent had been doing all the videocard reviews there... well, guess that's what I get for figuring!

 

[mr]

Kudos to Brent

AFAIK Sean Pelletier did that review. Kudos to him.
(and nevertheless Kudos to Brent for his efforts on the other reviews)

 

[elroy]

Yeah it was Sean. Very well written review indeed. Almost Beyond3Desque!

 

[RussSchultz]

One question: all of his "iq" investigations used the color bands as "proof" that one is better than the other.

How does that bear our in practice?

Assuming your mip map sampling mechanism provides precise and continuous results, you could have single pixel transitions (i.e. no blending) between the mipmaps when using anisotropic, no?

Or is it too difficult to obtain that precise and continuous result?

This kind of relates to this thread by Reverend.

 

[martrox]

Russ, I guess the point is that you want to have a level playing field when comparing cards..... If you prefer the lesser quality IQ, then compare lesser IQ, not compare what is definately inferior filtering to something much better. - And, at the end of the review Sean did show you the differences between the aggressive, balanced and application filtering, and included the best ATI filtering for comparison.

EDIT: where's the spelling checker

 

[Sabastian]

Well of course I found that rather refreshing compared to other reviews. The comparison using 3DMark2003 as apposed to 3DMark2001 most appropriate for these DX9 cards. Nice objective comparisons on the IQ and clearly they point out that indeed ATIs DX9 products from last year are better of course we all know that anyhow. But it was nice to see a non PR type of review of these cards. Also I can't be more happy about the noting of nvidia marketing of "cinematic" rendering for $79 but am kind of disappointed the $79 card didn't make an appearance so we can see just what kind of "cinematic" experience people will get for $79 as opposed to the $150 "ultra" gffx 5200. Clearly ATi pulls ahead in all areas with the Radeon 9500 pro that sells in relatively the same price range of the NV31"ultra", NV34"ultra". I think they did a good job as well.

 

[martrox]

Of course, it does remain to be seen IF ATI's replacement for the 9500Pro - 9600Pro - is in the same league, or more in the 5600Ultra's league..... Point being, might be in your best interest, IF you are in the market for a $200.00 videocard, to run out and get a 9500Pro..... or even spend a little bit more )mailorder) and get a 9700......

 

[Sabastian]

Of course, it does remain to be seen IF ATI's replacement for the 9500Pro - 9600Pro - is in the same league, or more in the 5600Ultra's league..... Point being, might be in your best interest, IF you are in the market for a $200.00 videocard, to run out and get a 9500Pro..... or even spend a little bit more )mailorder) and get a 9700......

Can't really argue with that at this point. I would really like to see some objective comparisons between the Radeon 9600 pro and the Radeon 9500 pro. The reduction in transistors on the RV350 compared to the R300 core is so much it is almost alarming but the clock speed should make up for quite a bit.

 

[RussSchultz]

Russ, I guess the point is that you want to have a level playing field when comparing cards..... If you prefer the lesser quality IQ, then compare lesser IQ, not compare what is definately inferior filtering to something much better. - And, at the end of the review Sean did show you the differences between the aggressive, balanced and application filtering, and included the best ATI filtering for comparison.

You missed my point.

I'm asking if the color bands are really indicators of "IQ". Sure, they show the shape, and also the blending transition between the mip maps, but does that really translate to anything in particular, particularly the blending transition?

Wouldn't a more telling test be a clean checkerboard and/or grid pattern? With that you could see that the samples line up properly and (hopefully) you cannot see any abrupt transitions.

 

[jandar]

Russ,

they do comparison shots with UT2003 between aggressive and application mode as well without showing MipMap lines. You can cleary see the difference in Ansio being performed.


but yeah, basing it strictly on mip map lines would be bad.

 

[martrox]

Russ, I guess the point is that you want to have a level playing field when comparing cards..... If you prefer the lesser quality IQ, then compare lesser IQ, not compare what is definately inferior filtering to something much better. - And, at the end of the review Sean did show you the differences between the aggressive, balanced and application filtering, and included the best ATI filtering for comparison.

You missed my point.

I'm asking if the color bands are really indicators of "IQ". Sure, they show the shape, and also the blending transition between the mip maps, but does that really translate to anything in particular, particularly the blending transition?

Wouldn't a more telling test be a clean checkerboard and/or grid pattern? With that you could see that the samples line up properly and (hopefully) you cannot see any abrupt transitions.

Ok, let me add this... the point of the color bands was to locate which settings on the FX's that did trilinear filtering, so that the cards can be compared with similar settings. As far as IQ goes, again, check out the IQ comparison on page 10 of the review. Now, if you are questioning wether trilinear filtering is a worthwhile feature, well then, it seems to me that just a short time ago, nVidia was condeming ATI for NOT using trilinear filtering with their anisotropic filtering..........so what's the difference?

 

[Mulciber]

Russ, I guess the point is that you want to have a level playing field when comparing cards..... If you prefer the lesser quality IQ, then compare lesser IQ, not compare what is definately inferior filtering to something much better. - And, at the end of the review Sean did show you the differences between the aggressive, balanced and application filtering, and included the best ATI filtering for comparison.

You missed my point.

I'm asking if the color bands are really indicators of "IQ". Sure, they show the shape, and also the blending transition between the mip maps, but does that really translate to anything in particular, particularly the blending transition?

Wouldn't a more telling test be a clean checkerboard and/or grid pattern? With that you could see that the samples line up properly and (hopefully) you cannot see any abrupt transitions.

I agree, I kept waiting for him to prove to me that Balanced actually looked worse that ATIs quality "in game". Not only that, but from what I understand, a lot of people use ATIs "performance" while playing their games. An investigation of this seems necessary considering its what almost all other reviews used when compairing balanced.

Dont get me wrong, I loved the review, but it almost seems that now we're performing "synthetic" IQ compairisons instead of real ones. No mention was made of ATIs degree sensitive AF usage either.

 

[martrox]

Hmmm....maybe someone should just compare every mode on the cards..... might be a pretty massive download.....

I would have loved to see the difference between the rest of the modes on th ATI... but, in all honesty, don't you think this will be better served with the GF5600Ultra compared to the 9600Pro.... The 9500Pro is in a league of it's own.... and that league is closing down..... :?

This isn't a horse race, because all these different cards leave the gate at different times... so it's kind of like shooting at a moving target.....

 

[RussSchultz]

Now, if you are questioning wether trilinear filtering is a worthwhile feature, well then, it seems to me that just a short time ago, nVidia was condeming ATI for NOT using trilinear filtering with their anisotropic filtering..........so what's the difference?

Martrox, please don't turn this into an ATI vs. NVIDIA thing, and particularly don't try to make this into a fan boy thing.

I'm interested in this because of Dave's poll here, Brents useage of the colored bands as an "proof", Reverend's thread mentioned above, and even Beyond3d's useage of those bands as "proof". It suddenly has become the test de riguour, and I'm wondering if the "measurements" are really valid and if and how they could be misleading.

 

[Mulciber]

Hmmm....maybe someone should just compare every mode on the cards..... might be a pretty massive download.....

I would have loved to see the difference between the rest of the modes on th ATI... but, in all honesty, don't you think this will be better served with the GF5600Ultra compared to the 9600Pro.... The 9500Pro is in a league of it's own.... and that league is closing down..... :?

This isn't a horse race, because all these different cards leave the gate at different times... so it's kind of like shooting at a moving target.....

I also agree, compairing the 9500Pro to the 5600Ultra isnt necessarily "wrong" because they are in the same price range, but it certainly is akward to say the least. Not only that, but people keep making references to the DX9 for $79 when mentioning their reviews on the 5200Ultra, when its obvious the $79 itteration will have a significant performance decrease compaired to the Ultra.

I think we'll just have to wait till the 9500Pro really gets phased out completely until those reviews will really be accurate though. Im sure phasing it out will be good for ATI, but not for us poor consumers

 

[martrox]

Russ, I'm not trying to make this a "fanboi" thing, at all. And I understand what you are saying, but I didn't see the "banding " thing as anything other than trying to get to the bottom of just what filtering the FX's were using, not an "IQ" thing per se. I think you are picking at one small detail to the detrement of the rest of the review, which is what this thread is about.

Now, do you want to talk about wether the trilinear filtering has any effect on IQ? If so, then let's start another thread about that.

 

[LeStoffer]

I'm interested in this because of Dave's poll here, Brents useage of the colored bands as an "proof", Reverend's thread mentioned above, and even Beyond3d's useage of those bands as "proof". It suddenly has become the test de riguour, and I'm wondering if the "measurements" are really valid and if and how they could be misleading.

You have a good point, since still shots can't show whether it is a problem or not.

So I asked Brent earlier whether the boundries between mip-maps are easy to notice in motion in Balanced mode and here was what he replied:

Yep, i have looked at it in motion and in motion is where you can notice the differences the most rather then just a static screenshot

clearly in SS2 Application is superior to Balanced and matches ATI's default Tri with no af

 

[martrox]

And, as far as the fanboi thing goes, doesn't it seem a bit strange for me to post that I don't feel that comparisons of the FX5600Ultra to the soon to be missing in action 9500Pro as nessasarily a "fair' thing "if" I'm such a fanboi? Let's compare it to the 9600Pro when it's available.....

But I still believe this review did do a great service to the community by trying to do an apples to apples IQ comparison.... and for that, Sean had no choice but to find out just what filtering the FX was doing as nVidia is not being quite forthcoming as to what their settings really are......

EDITamn... my typing sucks somethimes.....

 

[RussSchultz]

I'm sorry, Martrox. The statement of yours I quoted above (questioning why I didn't ask about this when NVIDIA was pointing out no trilinear w/anisotropic on ati) sounded like you were suggesting I was only interested in this because of the parties involved and the positions they were in.

If that wasn't the case, mea culpa.

 

[martrox]

No problem, Russ..... I know sometimes I can come across as a fanATIc, but the reality is I've own far more nVidia products(in fact, the first ATI card I've own - since the RAGE many moons ago - is the 9700!).... I just have a real problem with nVidia's hypocrisy and marketing...... But, bottom line, when it's my money, I buy the best product I can..... ATM, it's ATI for me. But, if the NV35 comes out and is better than anything else out there.... well, it will find a home on my ATM nVidia nForce2 MB.......