Our testing methods
As ever, we did our best to deliver clean benchmark numbers. Tests were run three times, and the results were averaged.

Our test system was configured like so:

Today I'll be comparing the Tornado GeForce FX 5200 Ultra's performance with the vanilla GeForce FX 5200, the GeForce FX 5600, and a couple of Radeons from ATI. Since the performance of Inno3D's Tornado should accurately reflect the performance of all GeForce FX 5200 Ultra cards that run at NVIDIA's prescribed core and memory clock speeds, I'll be using Inno3D's Tornado as a reference point for GeForce FX 5200 Ultras as a whole.

Recently, the issue of driver-based cheating and optimizing for specific tests has called into question the legitimacy many of the test applications we use regularly here at TR. As always, we've done our best to ensure that we're delivering clean, reliable benchmark numbers. We have taken steps to circumvent known driver cheats in our testing today. However, we are working on some new methods for graphics testing intended to sidestep common cheats. Those methods will debut in a future article. Stay tuned.

The test system's Windows desktop was set at 1024x768 in 32-bit color at an 85Hz screen refresh rate. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests.

We used the following versions of our test applications:

• FutureMark 3DMark 2001 SE Build 330
• FutureMark 3DMark03 Build 330
• ChameleonMark
• Codecreatures Benchmark Pro
• Comanche 4 demo benchmark
• Quake III Arena v1.31
• Serious Sam SE v1.07
• VillageMark v1.17
• Unreal Tournament 2003
• Splinter Cell v1.2

All the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.