5700 ultra vs 5800

I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?
--
Mark H --- Frag on !
NF7-S v2.0 Win2k-sp4
WinXp-sp1a

The 5700 has 4 pipes and a 128 bit memory interface. The 5900 has 8 pipes
and a 256 bit memory interface.
I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

--
DaveW



"Mark H" wrote in message
...
I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?
--
Mark H --- Frag on !
NF7-S v2.0 Win2k-sp4
WinXp-sp1a

the 5800 has 8 pipes and a 128 bit memory interface n dx9 capable.

"DaveW" wrote in message
news:Vi1Kb.284487$_M.1451018@attbi_s54...
The 5700 has . The 5900 has 8 pipes
and a 256 bit memory interface.
I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

--
DaveW



"Mark H" wrote in message
...
I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?
--
Mark H --- Frag on !
NF7-S v2.0 Win2k-sp4
WinXp-sp1a

The FX5800 should do DX9, but... don't expect wonders!

"DaveW" wrote in message news:Vi1Kb.284487$_M.1451018@attbi_s54...
The 5700 has 4 pipes and a 128 bit memory interface. The 5900 has 8 pipes
and a 256 bit memory interface.
I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

--
DaveW



"Mark H" wrote in message
...
I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?
--
Mark H --- Frag on !
NF7-S v2.0 Win2k-sp4
WinXp-sp1a

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 16:06:42 -0500, Mark H wrote:

I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?
--
Mark H --- Frag on !
NF7-S v2.0 Win2k-sp4
WinXp-sp1a

The 5800 is now obsolete. Replaced by the 5900 non-Ultra/Ultra and
5950. (The 5600 is now obsolete. Replaced by the 5700.)

Compare the FX5900 non-Ultra, Ultra, FX5950 and FX5700. Do a Google
search for the specs. The 5900 in any form except the cheesy very-
slow-memory SE version is generally faster in real 3D applications
than any version of the 5700, DDR2 or not. (8 pixel-pipes instead of
4) Also Anandtech.com and Tom's Hardware will provide further details.
The FX5900/128meg non-Ultra ( and non SE!! ) with 400 MHZ GPU
and 850MHz memory is a sweet deal these days. No matter which one
you get, make sure that you check both the GPU and memory speeds
specs on the Manufacturer's web-site for that specific model !! If
one or other spec is not there... don't buy.........

John Lewis

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:26:46 GMT, "DaveW" wrote:

The 5700 has 4 pipes and a 128 bit memory interface. The 5900 has 8 pipes
and a 256 bit memory interface.
I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

Hence, you're severly wrong information in both newsgroups should mean
you have no business giving out information.

All fx5x00 cards are DX9 cards.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 16:06:42 -0500, Mark H wrote:

I'm new to the 5000' series, is there any internal hardware differences
like pipe lines of the sort between the 5700 ultra or 5800-5900, or are
the differences just clock speed?

More than that... Clock speed isn't everything... the 5900 is LOWER
clock, but easily a faster card. An AMD is 1000Mhz lower than the P4
but rates about the same as the P4, The ATi is about half the Mhz, yet
is usually the faster card as well.

Read this review... its in the middle, but go to page 1 and read it
all.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...charts-05.html


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

Hence, you're severly wrong information in both newsgroups should mean
you have no business giving out information.

All fx5x00 cards are DX9 cards.

Being a DX9 card and being capable in DX9 are two different things. Look
at the FX5200 card, for instance.

On 6 Jan 2004 19:00:16 -0600, tq96 wrote:

I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

Hence, you're severly wrong information in both newsgroups should mean
you have no business giving out information.

All fx5x00 cards are DX9 cards.

Being a DX9 card and being capable in DX9 are two different things. Look
at the FX5200 card, for instance.

well... look what he wrote "5800 is not dx9 capable" - see the top of
this message?

5200s are DX9 cards... they're just ****ty DX8 & DX9 cards, that's
all.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 06:56:03 GMT, Darthy
wrote:

On 6 Jan 2004 19:00:16 -0600, tq96 wrote:

I don't believe the 5800 is DX9 capable, unlike the above boards.

Hence, you're severly wrong information in both newsgroups should mean
you have no business giving out information.

All fx5x00 cards are DX9 cards.

Being a DX9 card and being capable in DX9 are two different things. Look
at the FX5200 card, for instance.

well... look what he wrote "5800 is not dx9 capable" - see the top of
this message?

5200s are DX9 cards... they're just ****ty DX8 & DX9 cards, that's
all.

So to get it right, the fx5700 is a directx 9 capable card and as a
128mbs/256mbs, 256 bit memory architecture?

So it's a good choice?