ASUS V9570 TD 256MB &
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) Video Cards
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700/5600XT
|
CONTENTS
-
Video cards features
-
Testbed, test tools, 2D quality
-
Test results: Performance Comparison
-
Conclusion
Today we will examine some more video cards and speak about PCB color.
This subject is not that global or pressing but, still, it's very interesting.
But first of all have a look at the reviews covering NV3x aspects.
Theoretical materials and reviews of video cards which concern functional
properties of the GPU NVIDIA GeForce FX
- Analysis of the architecture
of NVIDIA NV30 (GeForce FX)
- NVIDIA GeForce FX
5800 Ultra (NV30) - single-page review
- NVIDIA GeForce FX
5800 Ultra (NV30) - multi-page review
- NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
Ultra (NV31) and GeForce FX 5200 Ultra (NV34) - single-page
review
- NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
Ultra (NV31) and GeForce FX 5200 Ultra (NV34) - multi-page review
- ASUS V9900 Ultra on
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5800 Ultra - AA and anisotropy quality
- Gainward FX Powerpack
Ultra/1000 Golden Sample and Gainward FX Powerpack Pro/660 TV/DVI
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5800 Ultra and 5200 - scaling (performance
vs. CPU clock speed) of GeForce FX 5800 Ultra, performance of GeForce
FX 5200
- Leadtek WinFast
A300 Ultra MyVIVO on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5800 Ultra - performance
of GeForce FX 5800 Ultra vs. CPU clock speed in heavy modes with
AA and anisotropy enabled
- MSI FX5800 Ultra-TD8X
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5800 Ultra
- Albatron, Chaintech, Gainward,
InnoVision, Leadtek, Palit and Prolink video cards on NVIDIA GeForce
FX 5200
- ASUSTeK NVIDIA GeForce
FX 5200/5600 video cards
- MSI FX5600-VTDR128 (MS-8912)
card on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
- Albatron, Leadtek and MSI
video cards on the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
- Prolink PixelView GeForce FX 5600 256MB
Golden Limited on the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
- Gainward FX PowerPack Ultra/760 XP Golden
Sample on the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 (new revision)
- AOpen and Soltek cards on NVIDIA GeForce
FX 5600
- Leadtek WinFast A310 Ultra MyVIVO on NVIDIA
GeForce FX 5600 Ultra (350MHz revision)
- ATI vs NVIDIA: where are fair
duels? or Dishonest Treatment of the 3DMark
- MSI FX5900-VTD128 on NVIDIA GeForce FX
5900 - More on 3DMark 2003 (fruits of collaboration of NVIDIA
and FutureMark after signing the peaceful agreement)
- Gainward FX Powerpack Ultra/1200 Golden
Sample on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 - performance in NEW game tests,
analysis of performance of the FX 5900 without cheats
- Albatron Gigi GeForce FX 5900PV 128MB
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
- Inno3D Tornado GeForce FX5900 128MB on
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900
- ASUS V9950 Ultra on NVIDIA GeForce FX
5900 Ultra - extremal overclocking
- AOpen Aeolus GeForce FX 5600S 256MB on
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
- ABIT, ASUSTeK and Chaintech cards on the
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 Ultra
- Gainward Powepack FX Ultra/1600 GS CoolFX on the NVIDIA GeForce
FX 5900 Ultra - Drivers 51.75 beta
- Gainward Powepack FX Ultra/1600 GS CoolFX
on the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra - Drivers 51.75 beta
- Prolink PixelView GeForce FX 5900 128MB
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 - Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness Benchmark
- NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900SE/XT from Albatron
and Leadtek
- NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (NV38) and
GeForce FX 5700 Ultra (NV36)
- Gigabyte GeForce FX 5950 Ultra 256MB
- drivers 52.70 vs 52.16
- Albatron Gigi GeForce FX 5700 Ultra 128MB
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
- Leadtek WinFast A380 Ultra MyVIVO 256MB
and ASUS V9950SE on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950Ultra/5900SE
- Chaintech GeForce FX 5600XT 128MB 64bit;
Chaintech GeForce FX 5600XT 256MB 128bit; Chaintech GeForce FX 5700
Ultra 128MB; Chaintech GeForce FX 5900 128MB; Chaintech GeForce
FX 5950 Ultra 256MB
- Gainward CoolFX Ultra/1800 XP GS 256MB
on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950Ultra
- MSI FX5950 Ultra-VTD256 & MSI FX5700
Ultra-TD128 on NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950Ultra/5700Ultra &emdash;
3DMark03 v.340 on drivers 52.16 & 53.0
- NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra cards from
AOpen, InnoVision and Sparkle
The year 2004 has kicked off. What's new in the video card sector? In the
Low-End sector we have a big mishmash: there are old solutions, products
released at the beginning of 2003 and cards that appeared in autumn.. NVIDIA:
GeForce FX 5200 64bit, GeForce FX 5200 128bit, GeForceFX 5600XT 64bit,
GeForce MX 4000, GeForce4 MX440, GeForce4 MX440-8x...
ATI: RADEON 9000, RADEON 9000 PRO, RADEON 9200, RADEON 9200SE, RADEON
9100, RADEON 9600SE...
Poor user.. it's not easy to find out what's better and what's worse.
The branches in the forum concerning sub$100 cards are mushrooming. Today
we will study one of such cards. The other belongs to the Middle-End market.
This segment is quieter, though the situation is not that transparent either.
Modern GeForce FX 5600/5700 do not offer much more features compared to
the GeForce4 Ti 4200/4200-8x, especially accelerated models, though they
are much more expensive. DirectX 9.0 is not realized in most products yet,
and the 2002' products look much better in older games. The only features
that helps FX is a more efficient optimized anisotropic filtering which
almost hangs the older products.
Only the proper price policy allows making latest GeForces more popular.
Besides, ATI competes very toughly. As to ASUSTeK, this company is very
popular on our local market. In spite of sometimes imperfect quality and
other weak points this brand remains matchless (frankly speaking, I'm surprised
that other trade marks drag so far behind it). There is only Sapphire that
tries to catch up with ASUS.
So, PCB color. You might remember that earlier the card makers produced
cards of only two colors: yellow (light and dark) and green (light and
dark). Gainward was first to change the board color and painted them red.
It got a lot of followers, we tried to arrange color solutions but soon
we gave up that idea as PCB colors were unpredictable. ASUS tried black,
dark brown, lilac and green (it hadn't produced such cards before) colors,
and currently it has blue cards. This color is one of the most popular
today. Thanks to ATI, red boards are the most widespread today.
Today ASUS offers three colors: orange, blue and green. The first one
is offered for all ATI based cards, and the others are for NVIDIA based
ones. The blue color is used for Middle-End and High-End solutions while
Low-End cards are green. In my opinion, Gigabyte who gave birth to sky-blue
boards strictly keeps to its rules (except ATI based cards produced for
a couple of years); and it wasn't worth for ASUS to make blue cards. There
is a lot of other paints. But it's only my opinion.
So, today we have two ASUSTeK cards to test.
Cards
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
AGP x8/x4/x2, 128 MB DDR SDRAM in 4 chips on both PCB sides.
Samsung 5ns memory chips (corresponds to 200 (400) MHz), memory clocked
at 200 (400) MHz, GPU at 235 MHz. 64 bit memory bus (!) |
|
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
AGP x8/x4/x2, 256 MB DDR SDRAM in 4 chips on both PCB sides.
Samsung 3.6ns memory chips (corresponds to 275 (550) MHz), memory clocked
at 250 (500) MHz, GPU at 425 MHz. 128 bit memory bus. |
|
Comparison with the reference design, front view |
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
Reference card NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 |
|
|
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
|
|
Comparison with the reference design, back view |
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
Reference card NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 |
|
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
|
Both cards have similar designs based on the FX 5600. Only the power
supply units and location of d-Sub and DVI connectors relative each other
differ.
The V9560XT has twice fewer memory chips, however ASUS doesn't mention
that the memory bus is limited by 64 bits either on the box or in the
documentation! THAT IS VERY IRRESPONSIBLE of such a famous company!
The ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) has a standard GPU cooler often installed
on such cards. The memory chips are covered with heatsinks installed in
two rows under the angle of 90 degrees. Below you can see Leadtek's one.
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
The cooler consists of a copper-colored heatsink made of
aluminum alloy and a powerful fan. Such systems are also often installed
on video cards. By the way, it looks very attractive. |
|
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB |
This is a similar device, though it's smaller. The fan
has impellers which shine in UV rays. |
|
|
|
What do we have under the coolers?
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB
The chips have proper labels.
Both cards are equipped with external TV codecs; only the TV-out works
through the GPU.
Accessory packs:
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
The accessory pack is abundant! Beside all possible adapters
the card ships with a great deal of software! |
|
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
This pack has only different games. |
|
|
And here are the packages:
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
The box looks traditionally for ASUS. This time they use an image of
some fantastic hero (thanks God it's not a devil or a ghost) for the box's
front side. |
|
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
The package has almost the same dimensions and style, like that of
boxes of GeForce4 cards. Only the theme and colors change with time. |
|
Testbed and drivers
Testbed:
-
Pentium 4 3200 MHz based computer:
-
Intel Pentium 4 3200 MHz CPU;
-
DFI LANParty Pro875 (i875P) mainboard;
-
1024 MB DDR SDRAM;
-
Seagate Barracuda IV 40GB HDD;
-
Windows XP SP1; DirectX 9.0b;
-
ViewSonic P810 (21") and ViewSonic P817 (21")
monitors.
-
NVIDIA driver 53.03.
-
Athlon 64 3400+ based PC:
-
AMD Athlon 64 3400+ (2200 MHz = 220 MHz*10);
-
MSI K8T (VIA KT8);
-
1024 MB DDR400 SDRAM;
-
Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 SATA 80GB;
-
Windows XP SP1; DirectX 9.0b;
-
ViewSonic P810 (21") and ViewSonic P817 (21").
-
NVIDIA driver 53.03.
VSync off, S3TC off in applications.
Test results
Before we start examining 2D quality, I should say there are no complete
techniques for objective 2D quality estimation because:
-
2D quality much depends on certain samples for almost all modern 3D accelerators;
-
Besides videocards, 2D quality depends on monitors and cables;
-
Moreover, certain monitors might not work properly with certain video cards.
With the ViewSonic P817 monitor and BNC Bargo cable the cards showed excellent
quality at the following resolutions and clock speeds:
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB |
1600x1200x85Hz, 1280x1024x100Hz, 1024x768x100Hz |
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) |
1600x1200x75Hz, 1280x1024x100Hz, 1024x768x100Hz |
Test results: performance
Test application:
- Unreal 2: The Awakening (Infogrames), DirectX 8.1, multitexturing,
tested with Bench'emAll! 2.5beta.
- RightMark 3D
(one of the game scenes) - DirectX 8.1, Dot3, cube texturing, shadow
buffers, vertex and pixel shaders (1.1, 1.4).
Test settings: pixel shaders 1.1, shadow buffers OFF.
- Half-Life2 (Valve/Sierra) - DirectX 9.0, two different demos
(ixbt07
and coast).
Tested with anisotropic filtering enabled.
Note! Since this is the leaked beta version,
the test results can be just of conditional interest.
- Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell v.1.2b (UbiSoft) - Direct3D, Vertex/Pixel
Shaders 1.1/2.0, Hardware T&L, Very High quality; demo 1_1_2_Tbilisi.
AA doesn't work in this game.
- Call of Duty (MultiPlayer) (Infinity Ward/Activision) - OpenGL,
multitexturing, ixbt1203demo, test settings - maximum, S3TC ON
- Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness v.49 (Core Design/Eldos Software)
- DirectX 9.0, Paris5_4 demo, test settings are shown here.
If you need the demo benchmarks please email me.
Performance
-
1. Call of Duty
-
2. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell
-
3. Aquamark 3
-
4. Unreal 2: The Awakening
-
5. Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness
-
6. RightMark 3D
-
7. Half Life 2 beta
Conclusion
-
ASUS V9570 TD 256MB is a middle-level card in NVIDIA's row. 256MB memory
size is just a marketing trick, but it's not clear why the clock speeds
were brought down from 275 to 250 MHz (at 3.6ns!). It worsens the impression.
However, the card's success depends a lot on the prices. Quality and stability
of the card are excellent.
-
ASUS V9560XT/TD 128MB (64bit) is meant to be an input element into the
Low-End market where the FX5600 should be put into. However I don't understand
why to make a card which performs similarly to the FX5200 (128bit) but
has a higher price. What's wrong with the FX 5200? How is it possible to
separate price levels for FX 5200-64bit, FX5200-128bit and FX5600XT-64bit
in such a small segment? It's not clear why to make so similar products
(regarding speeds and features) changing only the names... Why to confuse
users?.. The card itself has perfect quality and stability.
In our 3Digest you can find full comparison
characteristics for video cards of this and other classes.
Write a comment below. No registration needed!
|
|
|
|
|