Arctic Sound-M vs GeForce FX 5900 Ultra

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1444not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.13no data
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Generation 12.5 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameNV35Arctic Sound
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date23 October 2003 (21 year ago)2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data8192
Core clock speed450 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors135 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt500 Watt
Texture fill rate3.600230.4
Floating-point processing powerno data14.75 TFLOPS
ROPs4128
TMUs8256

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x16
Length218 mm267 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x Molex8-pin EPS

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRHBM2e
Maximum RAM amount256 MB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit4096 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s1.23 TB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0a12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 500 Watt

FX 5900 Ultra has 747.5% lower power consumption.

Arctic Sound-M, on the other hand, has a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce FX 5900 Ultra and Arctic Sound-M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5900 Ultra is a desktop card while Arctic Sound-M is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
Intel Arctic Sound-M
Arctic Sound-M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Arctic Sound-M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.