Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(55) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 ]

Performance in Strategy Games

Command & Conquer Generals: Zero Hour

This strategy game isn’t new, but requires high pixel shader performance and an efficient graphics memory subsystem. We test the cards in this game manually, with the FRAPS utility, so the results are approximations.

Alas but the performance is greatly limited by the speed of the CPU in the “pure speed” mode, so we can’t say anything definite about the graphics cards proper. In the mainstream sector, the GeForce 6600 GT AGP looks best, once again confirming the superiority of the new generation of graphics architectures. The RADEON X700 XT is, however, ahead of the GeForce 6600 GT as it is somewhat better with pixel shaders.

The “eye candy” mode, especially in high resolutions, helps to differentiate between the cards. Devices with GPUs from ATI Technologies are in the lead, and the RADEON X800 PRO even delivers the performance of NVIDIA’s GeForce 6800 Ultra/GT. Among 8-pipelined AGP cards the GeForce 6600 GT AGP is faster than the RADEON 9800 XT, but by a narrow margin. As for the RADEON X700 XT, it is much better than the GeForce 6600 GT in low resolutions, but only by 2 fps in 1600x1200.

The SLI systems were functioning normally, even adding some more frames per second to the high resolutions of the “eye candy” mode.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 55
Discussion started: 02/16/05 04:28:52 PM
Latest comment: 08/25/06 10:59:51 AM

View comments

Add your Comment