In terms of performance, the GeForce FX 5600 reminded us a lot of the famous GeForce4 Ti 4200 but with DirectX 9 and vastly improved FSAA and AF performance thanks to the built-in Intellisample Technology. There were scenarios where the older GeForce4 Ti 4200-8x surpassed the GeForce FX 5600’s performance in non-FSAA situations and that’s because of the former’s much higher texture fill rate and GPU design. If FSAA and AF performance concerns you more, the GeForce FX 5600 was without a doubt a better performer. For those of you already holding on to the GeForce 4 Titanium series, the GeForce FX 5600 is definitely not the card you should be looking for an upgrade and we would recommend a higher class of graphics cards.
As for how it fared against its direct ATI RADEON competitor, both the GeForce FX 5600 and the RADEON 9500 (we used this to simulate RADEON 9600’s performance) took turns in bettering one another in various benchmarks. However, the GeForce FX 5600 faltered somewhat in Unreal Tournament 2003 just like its Ultra variant. Even in DirectX 9 tests, the RADEON 9500 proved to be the better contender. However, do note that this class of graphics cards weren’t really cut out for games and scenes with plenty of pixel shader operations, as the results did show that both cards scored very low frames per second. Therefore, if we were to compare with less taxing games (especially non DX9 games) that produce playable frame rates, the RADEON 9500 or RADEON 9600 is more or less in the same performance rung as the GeForce FX 5600.
Del med dine venner