Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(39) 
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 ]

Performance in Synthetic Benchmarks

Futuremark 3DMark03

The GeForce 7800 GTX 512 stops only 718 points short of a new record when it works at its default frequencies, but overclocking helps to overcome the barrier. The RADEON X1800 XT 512MB suffers a crushing defeat – it scores 2923 points less than the new card from NVIDIA.

This test doesn’t need too many comments. Even the ordinary GeForce 7800 GTX is equal to the RADEON X1800 XT 512MB at the worst. The GeForce 7800 GTX 512 has more power and its “eye candy” performance never goes below 220fps.

The GeForce 7800 GTX 512 wins all the resolutions of the second test, too, but note that the gap between it and the RADEON X1800 XT 512MB becomes much smaller as soon as we turn on FSAA and anisotropic filtering. It is no bigger than 2fps in 1600x1200 resolution. From the technological point of view, the test features normal maps and dynamic stencil shadows, so NVIDIA should have a certain advantage, but the RADEON X1800 XT 512 isn’t much worse than its opponent. We can assume then that the RADEON’s 1.5GHz memory with a RingBus controller is roughly equal to a traditional memory controller and 1.7GHz memory.

 
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 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 39
Discussion started: 11/15/05 10:07:52 AM
Latest comment: 01/09/07 05:03:13 AM

View comments

Add your Comment