Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(68) 
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 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 ]

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King




Note: minimal fps are marked with white numbers on the diagrams, black numbers represent average fps.

With FSAA and AF disabled, the new ones from ATI and NVIDIA are slowed down by the central processor’s performance in this game. It is only in the 1600x1200 resolution that we see any differences in the leading group. Particularly, the RADEON X800 Pro starts lagging behind the leaders. Strangely enough, the GeForce 6800, also with 12 pipelines and with much slower memory, suffers a smaller performance hit.

There’s parity in the camp of 8-pipeline GPUs of the previous generation: the results of the RADEON 9800 XT match those of the GeForce 5950 Ultra. The GeForce FX 5900/XT loses to the RADEON 9800 Pro somewhat. The RADEON 9600 XT surpasses the GeForce FX 5700, but in two low resolutions only – in 1600x1200 it evidently feels the lack of memory bandwidth and loses to its rival.




Note: minimal fps are marked with white numbers on the diagrams, black numbers represent average fps.

Nothing new happens when the load becomes heavier: the RADEON X800 XT and the GeForce 6800 Ultra go on fighting each other, while the RADEON X800 Pro obviously cannot handle the GeForce 6800 GT; sometimes it even sinks down below the GeForce 6800, which costs $100 less!

We can see a few interesting things in the sector of previous-generation solutions: the RADEON 9800 XT performs like the GeForce 5900/XT, but slower than the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra. The RADEON 9600 XT loses its ground to the attack of the GeForce FX 5700 with its fast memory and high geometry processing speed.

 
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 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 68
Discussion started: 08/01/04 08:24:29 PM
Latest comment: 08/30/06 11:16:51 PM

View comments

Add your Comment