Very Dissapointed with 5900 Ultra

StryderXX · Aug 29, 2003, 10:27 PM

Well I just picked up a Geforce FX 5900 Ultra by Leadtek and I must say that I am quite dissapointed. I replaced a Radeon 9700 Pro with this massive beast of a card and I really don't see that big of an improvement. I had my 9700 Pro OCed and had some BGA heatsinks on it and it was KICKASS! I had the core at 370 and the mem at 340. The FX Ultra just doesn't look (IQ) or feel as good as the 9700 Pro. The FX also runs very hot! The core runs at about 44C in 2d mode and jumps up to 70C after just a few minutes of gaming in 3D mode. I also notice that games run fine initially but after about 20 mins the games seem to slow down. Studder starts to appear out of no where.... Strange... maybe the core is clocking down because of the heat. Not sure... What bugs me is that this card is the best Nvidia could come up with after all this time. I used to be a avid Nvidia fan but now I have lost alot of respect for this company. IMO ATI is the way to go for high end PC gaming.

SX

Rayder · Aug 29, 2003, 10:35 PM

But...but.....haven't you read all the reviews comparing ATI to nVidia?

Oh! I see....this is your first post. You need to hang out here more often. You would have known better if you'd have done a little research first.

Welcome to DriverHeaven!

csl1010 · Aug 30, 2003, 02:09 AM

Rayder,

Then would you please tell me how FX5900 performs better than 9700/9800 significantly?

Kgentatszu] · Aug 30, 2003, 02:37 AM

well, it depends what you want.....if speed is all you want then, go for 5900 but if you want more !Q than anything else go for Radeon 9800pro....9700Pro's are for those who wou;d play games at a lower resolution like 1024x768.....basicly, in my oppinion, Nvidia's and ATi still produce great cards!!!

~~HawK~~ · Aug 30, 2003, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Maxxypoos
9700Pro's are for those who wou;d play games at a lower resolution like 1024x768.....basicly, in my oppinion, Nvidia's and ATi still produce great cards!!!

I beg your pardon?? where ever you came up with this??
I have a 9700np wich runs all my games very smooth in either 1600 or 1280 32bit!
Besides the diff. is not that great between the 9700 & 9800

back on topic
I think you sfould had stayed with the Ati for awhile, I'm not saying the 5900 is a bad card
but any upgrade should at least be a 50% gain or else you'd be dissapointed
and if you were reading the b3d dx9 benchmark, this is surely not the case.

Necrosis · Aug 30, 2003, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HawK
I beg your pardon?? where ever you came up with this??
I have a 9700np wich runs all my games very smooth in either 1600 or 1280 32bit!
Besides the diff. is not that great between the 9700 & 9800

I have the Pro version which still kicks some ass, and then some.

Kgentatszu] · Aug 30, 2003, 04:04 AM

sorry guys, what i really mean was that since the 98900Pro has higher clock speeds, so......ya know...higher resolutions and stuff like that.........anyway, both card wont yield much of a difference.....

StryderXX · Aug 30, 2003, 04:05 AM

I've been an Nvidia fan since the original TNT. I remember playing Quake 1/2, MDK, MotoRacer etc and loved it. Once the TNT2 came out I dumped my Voodoo2 SLI setup and never looked back. I've purchased every vid card that Nvidia created. Nvidia has a great past but lately it seems like they are losing focus on retaining the 3d accelerator crown. It broke my heart to hear people ripping into the 5800's blower and reading how Nvidia was cheating with there drivers when running 3dmark2003. I really didn't need a vid card upgrade but I heard some great things about the 5900 Ultra so I ran out and purchased one. Before I give up on this card I'm going to reformat and reinstall XP to see if maybe the 5900 will start to shine in my rig. Hopefully I'll have better results after that. (crossing my fingers) I just have this bad feeling that I should have waited to see what ATI has in store for us in October. I'll post my new results once I redo my system.

SX

~~HawK~~ · Aug 30, 2003, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Maxxypoos
sorry guys, what i really mean was that since the 98900Pro has higher clock speeds, so......ya know...higher resolutions and stuff like that.........anyway, both card wont yield much of a difference.....

yeah, but you should look to performance, not clock speed.
Look at 9500 vs 9600, the 9600 has almost double the clock speed than 9500, but on performance level there about the same

/back on topic:
Shure, but they (NVidia) should get there act together, and not bring halfbaked panic solutions, or they will loose more & more customers
I'm a big PVR fan, but that doesn't mean i'm still on a KyroII, if they deliver i'll buy it, if not I look elsewere.

***Zardon*** · Aug 30, 2003, 05:06 AM

we are testing a 5900 ultra right now, and the card has for all intents and purposes DIED.... it seemed to perform pretty well while it did work though.

Driver 7 · Aug 30, 2003, 06:35 AM

Get outa here. Why did it die. Please dont tell me it just died. There must be arctic silver on the resistors. Cummon man. That will break my heart if it just died.

***Veridian3*** · Aug 30, 2003, 08:03 AM

Completely stock, not overclocked...a weeks worth of general use and a days worth of benching...thats all it took too kill it.

Stu

kinetic · Aug 30, 2003, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veridian3
Completely stock, not overclocked...a weeks worth of general use and a days worth of benching...thats all it took too kill it.

Stu

Lets hope it was just a faulty card!

Driver 7 · Aug 30, 2003, 08:37 AM

Wow man. Thats the shittiest thing that could happen. For Nvidia's sake anyways. The moderators of this site have alot of influence online. A bad review like that could hurt. But it could have just been a flawed card. The runt of the litter say. Which brand is it?
I have had the leadtek for a month and a half not. No problems at all. Except I am not getting any extremley high benches with it.

Rayder · Aug 30, 2003, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by csl1010
Rayder,

Then would you please tell me how FX5900 performs better than 9700/9800 significantly?

I just meant that if he would have come here first and done some research he may never have bought a 5900 and would have saved himself alot of aggravation.

I was pretty tired when I wrote that, so I can see where it may have been misleading as to what I meant. Sorry about that.

BWX · Aug 30, 2003, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by StryderXX
[color=yellow]It broke my heart[/color] to hear people ripping into the 5800's blower and reading how Nvidia was cheating with there drivers when running 3dmark2003.

SX

Uhhh, well, I was dissapointed, - but- Heart broken? Dude, it's a stupid video card.. I liked Nvidia for years too- GF2 GTS pro, GF4 ti4200, then a 9700p from ATI- But I wouldn't lose sleep over ANY computer part--

It's all just a big money making machine anyway- no matter how much we like the products.

Driver 7 · Aug 30, 2003, 09:06 AM

Ya your right. Broken hearted ' s just an expression. Bad results are just starting to become a downer. There's no sleep loss here. Well at least there eont be when the long weekend is over.

Chaos · Aug 30, 2003, 09:31 AM

Well dude that sucks that you are not having good luck with your 5900.....perhaps once the Detonator 50.XX appear you can gain back some of your lost expectations....I know I am curious to see how those new Dets are gonna perform once they hit hte web

dipstick · Aug 30, 2003, 09:34 AM

Not sure what you are doing wrong but the 9700P is no competition for a 5900U. Also there is no way the 5900 runs hotter than a 9700. The 44c only seems high because you couldn't tell how freakin hot the 9700 was. Mine idles at 38c and hits a max of about 67c after afew hours of UTk3(OCed to 505/1000), which is not that bad, concidering the cards can run at up to 140c. Maybe you got a bad card, it happens, I got two bad 9700's when they first came out. But the 5900's do not do well in 3dmark 01, so do not judge from that, play some games and you'll see its a great card. You can also use nVhardpage from www.guru3d.com to turn some things on that will make the IQ better.

Driver 7 · Aug 30, 2003, 09:50 AM

I give ya that one. I play Black Hawk Down in 1280 x 1024 with FSAA on x2. It's so fast and the pictire is beautiful. I can spot a sniper on a mountain without binoc's. By the way. I am going to buy the swiftech water cooling kit today. In 2 hours. Is it possible to get the heatsink off the leadtek?

dipstick · Aug 30, 2003, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Driver 7
I give ya that one. I play Black Hawk Down in 1280 x 1024 with FSAA on x2. It's so fast and the pictire is beautiful. I can spot a sniper on a mountain without binoc's. By the way. I am going to buy the swiftech water cooling kit today. In 2 hours. Is it possible to get the heatsink off the leadtek?

Do not do that. I took mine apart and it did NOT fit. They do not have a block to fit anything over a 5600U. You can thank me later for saving you about an hour of work

Driver 7 · Aug 30, 2003, 10:15 AM

I'll thank ya now. Thanks. Now I will make you look. Check this out!!!

dipstick · Aug 30, 2003, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Driver 7
I'll thank ya now. Thanks. Now I will make you look. Check this out!!!

That's some amazing work. I want one!!

barbaricworm · Sep 11, 2003, 07:39 AM

you got a bad un mate i have the leadtek version im playing unreal2 1024/768 4xaa 4xaf no problem at all. silky as a babys bottom plus my temps dont go over 50c. but i think i will get a ati card when hl2 comes out just in case my 5900ultra cant hack it ill try the new dets first though

ToTTenTranz · Sep 14, 2003, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kakarot
Not sure what you are doing wrong but the 9700P is no competition for a 5900U.

Of course not! According to the latest HL2 benchmarks, the FX5900 Ultra's main competitor isn't the 9700 Pro, it's the 9600 Pro!

Going from a R9700 Pro to a FX5900 Ultra seems to be a total downgrade if you're willing to play future DX9 games..