Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(1) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 ]

And here is the list of our benchmarks:

  • Futuremark 3DMark 2001SE Build 330
  • Futuremark 3DMark03
  • Codecult CodeCreatures Benchmark Pro v1.0
  • Unreal Tournament 2003 v2225, Antalus Flyby
  • Quake 3: Arena v1.32, Demo four
  • Return to Castle Wolfenstein v1.4, Demo checkpoint
  • Serious Sam: Second Encounter v1.05, The Grand Catherdral
  • Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast  v1.04, Massasi Temple – Lightsaber Test
  • Splinter Cell v1.2b, 1_1_1Tbilisi Demo

We also tested the graphics card in Codecult CodeCreatures Benchmark Pro using unofficial 44.90 drivers. It is rumored on the Web that NVIDIA is “sharpening” its drivers for this test (as well as for a few others). This news proved true. When we used Detonator FX 44.90, the card’s performance dropped significantly in the CodeCreatures test. Well, now you will be able to see, how big is the influence of the drivers on the performance: even a minor change in the driver may push the performance to change dramatically in either direction.

Performance

We will start with the promised investigation on the “dependence of GeForce FX performance on the GPU and memory working frequencies”. It was carried out in the following benchmarks:

  • Unreal Tournament 2003 (Flyby Inferno and Asbestos);
  • Quake 3 Arena (Demo Four);
  • Codecult CodeCreatures.

Here are the results we got:

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 1
Discussion started: 02/29/04 04:03:17 AM
Latest comment: 02/29/04 04:03:17 AM

View comments

Add your Comment