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 ]

The third test has a more complex geometry than the second one, so it produces similar results, even though the advantage of the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 is more clearly outlined. Both opponents have 8 vertex processors, but they work at a higher frequency on the RADEON X1800 XT 512MB. So what prevented it from overtaking the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 in high resolutions of the “eye candy” mode? The problem must be somewhere in the Catalyst driver.

The fourth test makes use of numerous pixel and vertex shaders of version 2.0. The RADEON X1800 XT 512MB used to win here due to its high frequencies, but the new GeForce 7800 GTX 512 not only has high GPU and memory clock rates, but also 24 pixel processors. The combination of these factors makes up a real computational monster that can deliver 70fps and more even in the “eye candy” mode.

The overall triumph of the NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX 512 in this benchmark is beyond doubt, but it would not be so impressive if the total score was based on the “eye candy” results.

 
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