[PixelPipes] GeForce FX 5950 Ultra vs Radeon 9800XT // Card Battles

[-]

Sticky_Hulks@reddit

I had a 9800 Pro back in the day- absolute legend.

The fact that the FX 5950 Ultra was unplayable in new games just a couple of years after it came out, despite turning down settings, shows how good we have it now.

[-]

Cheap-Plane2796@reddit

Gpus became much faster each gen. Now a 5060 is not much faster than a 2060

[-]

Cheap-Plane2796@reddit

Tell me you bought your first gpu max 10 years ago without telling me.

In 2003 the difference between a 6 year old gpu vs a new one was 50 x not 2x.

There would also have been many major new technologies added to the new one, think dlss, dx12 or raytracing support in scope but every year instead of every 8 years

Now maybe you understand why the old gpu that is 50 x slower and doesnt support any tech from the last 4 or 5 generations wouldnt be able to run the newest games.

You dont expect a gtx 260 to run todays game, even though the difference between it and a 5060 is much smaller than the two gpus from 1997 and 2003

[-]

jenny_905@reddit

I've been in this longer than you

I know the reasons for rapid performance increases in the 90s and 2000s but also know why that was possible and isn't now.

Nobody is holding back, if it was possible to progress that quickly again they would be but the options are extremely limited and people are going to balk at the cost of the products these ever more expensive node shrinks enable.

[-]

Cheap-Plane2796@reddit

You re just completely changing the argument lol.

Its not about what is possible.

It s that gpus today need to support games for a long time because performance gains have ground to a halt.

Thats why i replied to the guy i initially replied to. We dont have it good today because gpu vendors graciously support their hardware better. Technology is at a standstill so obviously the new shit that is the same as the old shit +2-10 percent using the same underlying technology is still going to be compatible.

I would much rather return to a hypothetical world where gaming technology advanced at the pace that it did in the 90s in 2000s.

Especially since the standstill is happening just as gpus arent powerful enough for real time raytracing without massive development effort and without looking like visual soup.

[-]

dweller_12@reddit

Now imagine 2x in 1 year instead of 6.

[-]

jenny_905@reddit

Yeah I was there, before that even.

It sucked for the wallet keeping up with that progression in the 90s and early 00s but the gains were comparatively easy to make, as nodes shrink it has become a lot more difficult and more expensive each time.

I think people are going to balk at the price of the next node shrink necessary for big gains.

[-]

Asgard033@reddit

Now a 5060 is not much faster than a 2060

It's pretty substantially faster

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/geforce-x60-history-benchmarks-image-quality/5.html

[-]

KristinnK@reddit

Yeah, progress was insane back then. I had the 6600 GT, and that card was almost twice as powerful as the 5950 Ultra.

It would be like the 5060 was almost twice as powerful as the 4090. It sounds absurd, but that was literally the case back then.

If you bought a gaming computer you really needed to use it. Because 3-4 years later it wouldn't play new games anymore at any sort of reasonable frame rate.

[-]

txdv@reddit

I remember buying a GeForce 6800 Ultra because my friend insisted that the jump was so good that the 500$ was worth it.

500$ could get you the absolute high end graphics card on the market.

[-]

Dangerman1337@reddit

We didnt have huge dies back then. More analogue would be 5060 Ti being much faster than a 4080 Super.

[-]

KristinnK@reddit

I'll concede that point.

[-]

Blueberryburntpie@reddit

Same goes for other components.

I remember my dad upgrading our office desktop's OS from Windows ME (it BSOD'ed on our first day of usage) to Windows XP. Then he upgraded RAM from 128MB to 512MB for XP to stop running like molasses.

[-]

a_man_of_mold@reddit

In very late '98 or early '99 our first family PC was a Pentium I, possibly MMX, S3 Virge DX. My dad "upgraded" it from WIN95 to ME, which has a min requirement of 150 MHz and 32MB RAM - installer wouldn't let you continue without. So very likely had to be at least that spec, I doubt he would have known the /nm bypass switch.

Funny you mention Lego Rock Raiders because I remember playing it with crazy graphical glitches on that S3, and it must have run like 10 FPS, but when you're a kid you pay stuff like that no mind. Still have the original disc. You could choose between plain old Direct3D, Voodoo (Glide), and I think another proprietary API for S3 Savage cards.

[-]

bubblesort33@reddit

Guy at Future Shop sold me an ATI All-In-Wonder 9800 PRO, even though I had no need for all that TV tuner stuff, and I still don't get what it even did. Record TV? Ran good at the time, but I have no idea if I ever got a good deal on it. I think it was in like 2004, so the card may have been a generation old. Played C&C generals, and HL2 pretty well, though. Wasn't Until ES Oblivion, where it struggled.

[-]

empty_branch437@reddit

Crazy how 9800xt seems like a new card until you remember it's from over 2 decades ago and the naming scheme is still somehow used now by AMD.

[-]

hackenclaw@reddit

AMD radeon naming scheme is a trainwreck anyway.

They didnt finish the HD8000,9000, then they start with R200 stop at R500, start with RX5000, now they jump to RX9000 skipping the RX8000 name. I wonder whats after RX9000? Another new format?

[-]

Routine-Lawfulness24@reddit

I mean 10070xt seems like a horrible name letter change seems mandatory at some point

[-]

jecowa@reddit

The RAIDEON Px170 XT: Prescription Strength

[-]

Dangerman1337@reddit

Probably a new name format.

[-]

Agloe_Dreams@reddit

Well, it kinda isn’t though - they changed to 90XX XT for the latest generation. In the same way that Nvidia did. Also note that “RX” is also only recent - the RX480 was the first RX. But I think they are pretty much stuck with it now.

[-]

lifestealsuck@reddit

Man the fx was horrible . I have fx 5600 and the 6600gt 1 years later smoked it .

[-]

Morningst4r@reddit

The 5600 got smoked by the previous Ti 4200 as well. It was just a really bad card

[-]

lifestealsuck@reddit

yea but the 4200 doesnt have dx9 ? Them glossy reflection sufface dude.

[-]

kaszak696@reddit

FX kinda did but not really. That architecture ran well with DX8 and older shaders, but using DX9 sharers would often nerf the performance into the ground, as is evident in that video. It was just a failed generation.

[-]

lukfi89@reddit

I was there, Gandalf. I was there 3000 years ago.

I even owned a Radeon 9800 Pro at one point. The Radeon 9700/9800 was legendary even back then. The GeForce FX too, except that was a legendary failure.

[-]

Top-Tie9959@reddit

Coolers were horrible back then. I have an old fx 5700 for a retro PC and even though it has a tiny mid tier cooler it is loud as hell. Of course, this was the era where people installed 55db tornado fans on their CPUs and fart pipe exhaust on their honda civics so maybe everyone's hearing was so blown out they didn't notice.

[-]

caspissinclair@reddit

With our new Geforce FX 5950 we can finally compete with the Radeon 9700 pro!

...Whaddya mean, "9800xt?!?"

[-]

sahui@reddit

I had a 9800XT; and it was beautiful to play some Far Cry 1. It was a great card that lasted several years being still good to use

[-]

surf_greatriver_v4@reddit

Ok, you got me with that title