Does this BFG Asylum5700 Ultra Have merit?

[dryadsoul]

According to Maximum PC it may, powered by nVidia's NV36 GPU, the company's first midrange that actually delivers decent performance in programmable shader games. Like the 9600 XT the 5700 uses a 128 bit memory interface, but sports 128MB faster DDR-II memory running at 450MHz. At $200 AMD it's not as fast as the top of the line board, but, it costs half of what the Geforce 5950 does and out clock's the new Radeon 9600 XT
and at only $200 each these Benchmarks say it all:


Geforce FX 5700


Halo 1.02 15.24 fps
UT2003 Flyby 81.1 fps
UT2003 Botmatch 57.6 fps
Quake3 MPC 108.7 fps
3DMark 2003 Game 2 26.1 fps
3DMark 2003 Game 4.0 22.1 fps
3DMark 2003 Overall 3934


(Since that won't work here's the Radeon Benchmarks)

Halo 1.02 15.00 fps
UT2003 Flyby 76.54 fps
UT2003 Botmatch 56.7 fps
Quake3 MPC 98.4 fps
3DMark 2003 Game 2 23.4 fps
3DMark 2003 Game 4.0 23.6 fps
3DMark 2003 Overall 3766

So, decide for yourself and pick what works best for you.....and remember i'm not pluggin Maximum PC, it just happens to be the ONLY Magazine. that i bother to subscribe too.

Thanks to Fatboys *****in' i'm gonna edit this post to enclude the Max PC Verdict(which i inadvertantly left out)

Radeon 9600 XT +Fortune Cookies
Great Progarammable shader performance for less than $200, & no external power requirement.
-Fortune Tellers The 128bit memory and slow memory ultimately cripples this boards performance.

GeForce FX 5700 +verse slinging
Great performance, decent overclockability, quiet single fan
-mud slinging
It's not as fast as the top of the line but only half the price

And they Both Scored an 8.................on a scale of 1-10 with a 9-10 being considered a KICK ASS score.

[Fatguy3]

But, if you turned on FSAA and AF, the 9600 would kick its ass. Plus you get HL2 with the 9600,making it only 150 dollars retail :)

...wow, I really hate nVidia... :devil:

[jpmonkey69]

Oh no! not another ATI Funboy :P

I am thinking that all this "driver cheating" thing was a long time ago... 2/3 months plus, and since then there have been 6 or 7 updates to the nvidia drivers and to 3dmark 2003, so there is NO WAY that anyone can say that nvidia are cheatin, at least not now.

Whilst I don't agree that nvidia marketed their products to the end user properly, it seems to me they are making amends.

I bought a GeForce FX 5600 from XFX, and when I found out how bad it was compared to my GeForce4600, I called XFX and complained. When the 5700 Ultra came out, I complained again... saying I thought I had been cheated by cunning marketing ploys, relying on the fact I was just getting a graphics card and chose the new nvidia 5600 on the basis I had an nvidia anyway... XFX ended up giving me a 5900 Ultra :) .

I like nVidia.:afro:

[amd_man2005]

Basically, the FX5200, FX5600, and FX5800 were merely a joke, as they were nothing they were hyped up to be. I'd go with ATi at the time, as nVidia's having their PixelShader 2.0 issues (Part of DX9) while ATi is running along smooth

[Mista K6]

Yah, lets hope nVidia can put a new line as good as its old Ti4xxx series, cause Ati is really spanking them now :shoot3: .

[SearanoX]

I'm an ATi fanboy, but this stuff really looks nice. nVidia has been struggling recently, and this is the kind of stuff that will bring them back to the top. However, this card still doesn't look like it will have any real DX9 support...judging by those Halo scores, I'm guessing that they don't have Pixel Shader 2.0 enabled...though I could be wrong.

And damn, how is it that they're getting higher botmatch scores than my 9800? Lousy slow motherboard...ah well, at least mine beats the hell outta them when it comes to Flyby. ;)