Gfx Card Test

[rcgamer]

heres mine . looks ok for a "POS".

 

[Trotterwatch]

heres mine . looks ok for a "POS".

The FX5200 is undeniably feature rich. The bone of contention comes when you try to use some of those features for PC games (Pixel Shader 2.0) then it can cause single digit framerates due to the slow memory/clockspeed.

 

[rcgamer]

yeah i know about the slow mem/clock. But i always feel i have to take up for it. its been good to me the last year or so. now im just waitning for the new nvidia cards to come out, and the fx line will get cheaper. then maybe i can afford a 5900. dare to dream.

 

[euphoria]

Doom, i got the runtimes from your site and nothing changed. Weird.

 

[Doomulation]

Very weird.
Well, there IS a hack I could try....if I find the correct message to send to the comboboxes...
but other than that, if it isn't a known issue, there's nothing I can do about it.

 

[cooliscool]

heres mine . looks ok for a "POS".

As Trotterwatch said, while it has many features, most of the more advanced (PS2.0) runs way too slow to be enjoyable, hence it's a POS.

 

[Doomulation]

Btw, according to dx's documentation, there is ps 3.0.
Is this supported on some cards? And if so, which? I've never seen any cards that supports ps 3.0.
Is it m$ that's messing with us or something?

 

[Clements]

PS 3.0 (and VS 3.0 as well) is supported by the GeForce 6xxx series. I *think* that these are a part of the new DX 9.0c which is soon to be released.

 

[rcgamer]

actually you can get dx 9.0c now . you have to find and download the latest build for service pack 2 for windows xp. not the release candidate but build 2126.

 

[Xade]

yeah i know about the slow mem/clock. But i always feel i have to take up for it. its been good to me the last year or so. now im just waitning for the new nvidia cards to come out, and the fx line will get cheaper. then maybe i can afford a 5900. dare to dream.

I'm not going to go down the old 5200-bashing route again, but that was a damned fine opportunity...

As for getting yourself a 5900... well... undeniably an improvement (duhh) but at the same time not something to go out of your way for. I'm pretty pleased with my 5900 ultra, particularly the overclocking ability, but... I don't know... it's slightly underwhelming. Certainly not the utter beast that it was made out to be at one point. If you could get one sub £175 ($300) I guess it would be worth considering, but...

(What is it with me and bashing my own video cards?!)

 

[Reznor007]

You can find Radeon 9800 Pro's on newegg.com for a little over $200 US...that would blow a 5200 out of the water.

 

[sheik124]

and if you can't LIVE without nVidia (i know i can't) the 5900XT (slower than 5900, not faster, although easily oc'able to 5900 Ultra levels) is attainable for a similar price

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

[No message]

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

I'm happy with DirectX 9.0b, because I don't know if DirectX 9.0c will even change anything related to FPS by major or not? :ermm:

 

[omnislash124]

Wow, Intel really is crap....

 

[Doomulation]

Indeed...
Without hardware support, it's pretty slow.

 

[ShizZy]

Neat Doom, but all of this is built into DirectX. It also has the DXCapsViewer utility, which is the same thing, just a little more robust. For anyone who as the DX SDK installed, it's in the C://DXSDK/Bin/DXUtils/ folder.

 

[Doomulation]

Not everyone has dx caps viewer, it's hard to find and not the easiest to use. Plus it was meant to be able to advice of its compliancy with dx (ie, dx9 compatible). I also intended to make it able to say if it's compatible with all plugins out there for n64, or if some things will be missing, but it just didn't come to. I had troubles messing around with opengl as well.