Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

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

Performance in Third-Person 3D Shooters

Battlefield 2142

This game doesn’t support display resolutions of 16:10 format, so we use a resolution of 1920x1440 pixels (4:3 format) instead of 1920x1200 for it.

The game isn’t new. Therefore it is not a hard test for modern graphics cards, even for mainstream solutions such as the Radeon HD 4850. Nvidia’s new cards can’t show all of their potential here, but you can note that the GeForce GTX 280 is somewhat ahead of the others at 1920x1440.

The new cards are unrivalled in terms of minimum speed, though. Theoretically, it means the frame rate fluctuates less, resulting in smoother gameplay. On the other hand, you won’t be able to feel that because the frame rate is high anyway. The cheaper, smaller and more economical Radeon HD 4850 provides as much comfort in this game as the GeForce GTX 260, so it is in more demanding games that we should look for any benefits from Nvidia’s new solutions.

BioShock

BioShock doesn’t support FSAA when running in Windows Vista’s DirectX 10 environment. We benchmark graphics cards without FSAA in this game.

Not a very demanding application, BioShock can however show the difference between graphics cards.

Although benchmarked without FSAA, the GeForce GTX 280 is superior to every other single graphics card in every display mode. It is 12% faster than the Radeon HD 4870 at 1280x1024. Not much for a $200 difference in price, however. The gap shrinks to 7-9% at the higher resolutions, so that’s hardly a convincing win even considering the better minimum speed. The GeForce GTX 260 is somewhat slower than the Radeon HD 4870 at every resolution, save for 1280x1024.

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

Discussion

Comments currently: 5
Discussion started: 08/06/08 10:26:11 PM
Latest comment: 08/10/08 03:31:30 AM

View comments

Add your Comment