1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Msi Fx 5600

By vassil3427 · 12 replies
Jun 30, 2003
  1. Msi Fx 5600 Video Card

    In the wake of burning up my video card, I'm looking at a new one something not really expensive though. I found two cards I like,
    The MSI FX 5600 128mb
    I like this because it comes with a remote control and video inputs, and its bundled with lots of software.
    The MSI FX 5600 256mb
    I like this one because I would think the more memory would help in the newer games coming out.
    Now if you look on both of those links, both cars say they have 11.2GB memory bandwith, that seems to be alot more than the other 5600's out there, the other's say 8.8Gbs

    Both cards are around $200 so give me your opinions, or recommend another card...thanks..
  2. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 106

    You could get a Radeon 9700. While not as fast as the Pro version, its still probably at least 3 times as fast as the card you picked out. At newegg.com you can get it for about $220.
  3. vassil3427

    vassil3427 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 633

    I am aware that in most older and some present games the FX5600 performs poorly, but those all had 6.8GBs and 8.8GBs memory bandwith, the MSI cards I was talking about say they have 11.2Gbs bandwith, wouldnt that help the performance quite a bit? I couldnt find any reviews that tested these particular cards does anyone know how they perform?
  4. vassil3427

    vassil3427 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 633

    I was just reading up about the Radeon 9700, and it sais that it has over 17Gbs of memory bandwith, is that true? And do you all think I should get a Radeon 9700 instead of a FX 5600 256mb?
  5. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 106

  6. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    The Radeon 9700 is definitely the better card, so its the best choice. The only unknown quantity is whether or not it will work in your system as there are a large number of users that have had problems with Radeon 9700 Pro cards, myself included. I am currently waiting for my Radeon 9800 Pro card to arrive, and this is the last time I'll be buying ATI is this card doesn't work.

    Also, its a bit misleading when someone says that a card is x times faster than another, as really they are only refering to specific benchmarks and not every game that you may play.
  7. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 106

    Tis very true and is a very good point. I suppose I'm foolishly trying to quantify the performance of both cards. Unfortunately there's no other way to communicate the performance capabilties short of using the card yourself.
  8. PreservedSwine

    PreservedSwine TS Rookie Posts: 325

    I'd avoid the FX5600non-ultra, it quite a bit slower than an older Ti4600/4400/ and even 4200 in most cases.

    For that money, the R9700 non-pro is BY FAR a much better gaming card. I've a 9700non-pro, and play every single game w/ at least 4xFSAA and 16xQuality aniso. I appreciate it every time I'm gaiming, it really does make for an immersive environment, and adds to my enjoyment more than I ever thought it could:)

    EDIT: And this is for Nic:

    It's also a bit misleading when one person can't get his card to work, and posts over and over and over about his one expierence as if it happens to everyone:dead:

    And yes, the R9700np is as much as 3 OR MORE times as fast as a 5600non-ultra IN GAMES, with large doses of AA and AF.

    EDIT #2
    The FX5600ULTRA is a good card, just a bit pricey when you consider other options. Also, there are (2) versions of the FX5600ULTRA. If you get the first one, it sslower than a Ti4200(non-fsaa), but the second spin of the FX5600ULTRA gets quite a speed bump, and is considerably faster. Bear that in mind when reading a review. Could be an older review w/ the 1st revision, and is not entirely accurate of what you could get presently:)
  9. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    OK, I suppose going on about Radeon 9700 being source of many problems is playing it up a bit, but it was a very frustrating experience I had and I couldn't get my card to work in two difference PCs each with different hardware and powerful PSUs. I could have had a faulty card of course, but when two other people post in the same thread and each having identical problems, and with different hardware to mine, then you really have to wonder. There are many users that have had problems with the Radeon 9700 cards, though many have likewise been lucky and not had any bother.

    Check out this review of GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 vs Radeon 9700 Pro over at Hexus ...

    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 Review - Hexus

    some figures ...

    Serious Sam 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF
    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 = 83.7fps
    Radeon 9700 Pro = 92.6fps

    Quake 3 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF
    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 = 157fps
    Radeon 9700 Pro = 245fps

    Quake 3 1024x768 normal
    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 = 348fps
    Radeon 9700 Pro = 392fps

    Comanche 4 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF
    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 = 31fps
    Radeon 9700 Pro = 48fps

    UT2003 1024x768 4xAA 8xAF
    GeForce FX5600 Ultra Rev.2 = 68fps
    Radeon 9700 Pro = 101fps

    Now, I for one don't see any 'at least 3 times faster' on these benchmarks (ok were are comparing the 'ultra' version here, but that is a closer match in price, and its not a great deal faster than non-ultra version). What I see is that the Radeon 9700 Pro is around 50% faster than GeForce FX5600 Ultra when anti-aliasing (4x) and anisotropic filtering (8x) are switched on, and even less without those options. The Radeon 9700 Pro is the better card, but it is more likely to cause you problems if you are unlucky and it doesn't like your hardware.

    Here is another current thread about trouble with Radeon 9700 Pro (not me this time) ...

    ATI 9700 Radeon & MSI KT4V probs
  10. PreservedSwine

    PreservedSwine TS Rookie Posts: 325

    Nic, I never said it was 3x faster than a 5600ULTRA, I said 5600NON_ULTRA, but I guess you missed that? I went on to say the 5600ULTRA was a good card (revision2 only), just overpriced.

    I didn't mention, but maybe should have, about FSAA settings. Have you seen Nvidia's 4xFSAA compared to ATI's? I think ATI's 4xFSAA does more work than Nvidia's 4x, and is closer in IQ to Nvidia's 6x or 8x setting. See if you can find a reviwe w/ ATI 6xFSAA vs Nvidia's 8xfsaa. ATI's will look MUCH better, and be 3 times as fast as ANY 5600, and 3x as fast, in many games, as even a 5800ULTRA.

    Let's wait and see how Mr. Fork solves his porblem. Sounds like a poor PSU or perhaps a poor cooling solution on the R9700. WWe'll have to wait and see. I haven't seen very many issues AT ALL on any MSI mobo's w/ VIA chipsets, very solid combo.
  11. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    I have seen the AA difference between ATI and nVidia (and yes ATI has better AA), which is one reason why I did in fact buy a Radeon 9700 Pro, but later had to send it back as I couldn't get mine to work. I have now ordered an ATI 9800 Pro in the hope that I will have more luck with this newer card. I won't be too happy if this one also gives me problems. I have tried several nVidia cards in the past and never had a single problem. A good card that doesn't work in my system is not much use to me.
  12. JSR

    JSR Banned Posts: 564

    now, that's the right choice

    the 128 version of the 9800 is the sweet spot..........schweet :grinthumb the 5900 though is a good card...............but, for the money honey.............9800 pro 128........currently, about a hundy less than the comperable geforce........which is currently 369......hope you didn't pay more than that
  13. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,519

    I paid £281 ($420) for my Radeon 9800 Pro (I'm still waiting for delivery), and that's the cheapest in the UK. I know they are most likely much cheaper in the US, but that's not really an option for me.
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...