Unreal Tournament 2004 Demo
Unreal Tournament 2004 graphics engine didn’t undergo any changes compared with Unreal Tournament 2003 that is why we will not see any pixel shaders in this game. During the tests we used maximum graphics quality settings available in the demo version of the game.
The results are mostly determined by the fillrate and the memory bus bandwidth.
As we see, the overclocked ATI RADEON 9800 PRO is a little ahead of RADEON 9800 XT.
RADEON 9800 SE with 128bit memory bus yields to its 256bit analogue in both cases: with and without overclocking-friendly modifications, despite the higher working frequencies of the graphics processor and memory its performance is strongly affected by the narrow 128bit memory bus.
Due to successful overclocking and high working frequencies, RADEON 9600 XT defeats the 8-pipeline RADEON 9800 SE with 128bit memory bus, however, the 256bit version of the card appeared over its head.
Among NVIDIA based graphics cards, the leadership belongs to the overclocked GeForce FX 5900. GeForce FX 5900 XT is just a little bit slower than GeForce FX 5900 and when overclocked, it gets really close to GeForce FX 5950 Ultra.
GeForce FX 5700 Ultra based graphics card working at nominal frequencies outperforms ATI RADEON 9600 XT, but its poor overclocking potential makes it yield to ATI RADEON 9600 XT. And as for GeForce FX 5900 XT, there is nothing to comment on.
With enabled full-screen anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering the overall picture remains the same.
But look, how greatly grew up the results shown by the modified RADEON 9800 SE! The improvement is almost triple!
This performance gain results from a combination of three factors. Firstly, enabling 8 pixel pipelines doubles the fillrate. Secondly, overclocking improves the fillrate and the memory bus bandwidth in proportion to the graphics processor and memory speed increase. Finally, enabled HyperZ III increases the efficiency of the available memory bus bandwidth, which is especially valuable for modes with enabled FSAA.
Here I would like to draw your attention to the remarkable behavior of RADEON 9600 XT based solution: if in 1024x768 and 1280x1024 this card manages to run faster than RADEON 9800 SE, which gets a fully-fledged RADEON 9800 chips after the modifications, then in 1600x1200 RADEON 9600 XT yields notably to the rival. It looks as if RADEON 9600 XT featured a smaller low resolution Z-buffer cache, just like all other RV350/RV360 based products. So, in 1600x1200 with enabled FSAA 4x this buffer doesn’t fit into the cache, which automatically disables HyperZ III by RADEON 9600 XT and hence the performance drops.