Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(48) 
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 ]

Futuremark 3DMark06 build 120

The same as in 3DMark05, the GeForce 7900 quad SLI has a considerably lower overall score than its opponents.

The GeForce 7900 quad SLI is about as fast as the Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire in the SM2.0 tests, but these tests aren’t well suited for the latter: they require a high fill rate and do not use complex pixel shaders. The failure of the quad SLI platform here means that Nvidia’s got a lot of work to do yet: its four-GPU system is slower than the architecturally similar dual-GPU system in tests that are favorable for this architecture.

Doing somewhat better in the SM3.0/HDR tests, the GeForce 7900 quad SLI is at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire. That’s a good result considering that these graphics subsystems have the same number of pixel processors but Nvidia’s new solution has a lower GPU clock rate.

Shader Model 2.0 Game 1

The first SM2.0 graphics test is sensitive to the texturing speed, but the GeForce 7900 quad SLI isn’t faster than the Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire although the latter has fewer TMUs (32 against 96). The overall efficiency of the four-GPU systems seems to be low.

Shader Model 2.0 Game 2

It’s almost the same in the second SM2.0 test: the GeForce 7900 quad SLI is slower than the Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire in all the resolutions, including 2560x1600. The speed of this test depends but little on the fill rate parameter, but this doesn’t matter much when it comes to the standings of the tested graphics subsystems.

 
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 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 48
Discussion started: 04/30/06 06:20:50 AM
Latest comment: 02/24/08 11:04:30 PM

View comments

Add your Comment