What is the difference on NVidia FX chips?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

What is the difference between an FX5200 and the FX5900? Is it just MHz? I
was thinking of getting a FX5200 because that's what I might be able to
afford and just overclocking it with better cooling and maybe a voltage
mod. But what equivalalent performance could I expect? What performance
have other people gotten from doing this?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

danritter@telus.net wrote:

> What is the difference between an FX5200 and the FX5900? Is it just MHz?
> I was thinking of getting a FX5200 because that's what I might be able to
> afford and just overclocking it with better cooling and maybe a voltage
> mod. But what equivalalent performance could I expect? What performance
> have other people gotten from doing this?

There are not enough MHz in all Christendom to fix the 5200.

The chip is a different design--nvidia doesn't make it very clear what the
exact differences are between the various chips in the Geforce FX family
but the 5900 has 3 times as many transistors as the 5200 which means that
quite a lot that is present in the 5900 has been removed to make the 5200.

The most charitable thing that one can say about a 5200 is that it does put
an image on the screen.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

The 5900 is clocked MUCH faster; and has twice as wide a memory bus, which
you cannot overcome with overclocking.

--
DaveW



<danritter@telus.net> wrote in message
news:d%8Vc.25273$S55.15778@clgrps12...
> What is the difference between an FX5200 and the FX5900? Is it just MHz?
I
> was thinking of getting a FX5200 because that's what I might be able to
> afford and just overclocking it with better cooling and maybe a voltage
> mod. But what equivalalent performance could I expect? What performance
> have other people gotten from doing this?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

danritter@telus.net wrote:
> What is the difference between an FX5200 and the FX5900? Is it just
> MHz? I was thinking of getting a FX5200 because that's what I might
> be able to afford and just overclocking it with better cooling and
> maybe a voltage mod. But what equivalalent performance could I
> expect? What performance have other people gotten from doing this?

No way will you be able to overclock the 5200 to get anywhere near the 5900.

If you're expecting to be able to play any new games, forget the 5200.

--
Derek

 

[user]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

<danritter@telus.net> wrote in message
news:d%8Vc.25273$S55.15778@clgrps12...
> What is the difference between an FX5200 and the FX5900? Is it just MHz?
I
> was thinking of getting a FX5200 because that's what I might be able to
> afford and just overclocking it with better cooling and maybe a voltage
> mod. But what equivalalent performance could I expect? What performance
> have other people gotten from doing this?


Feature

5200
CineFX Engine CineFX

Intellisample Technology N/A

DirectX 9.0 YES

AGP 8X

UDA YES

Process 0.15micron

Pixels/Clock 4

Memory Interface 128-bit

Maximum Memory 128MB

RAMDAC 350

but......5900

CineFX Engine CineFX 2.0

Intellisample Technology Intellisample HCT

DirectX 9.0 YES

AGP 8X

UDA YES

Process 0.13micron

Pixels/Clock 8

Memory Interface 256-bit

Maximum Memory 256MB

RAMDAC 400

*so FX5900 is better the performance than FX5200

I can not speak english well because i am korean

and i'm sorry