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 ]

Sport Simulation Games

FIFA 2004




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

The RADEON X800 series starts off with banners waving, but loses to the GeForce 6800 Ultra/GT in the 1280x1024 resolution and thereafter. This is explained by the relative simplicity of the game engine as well as by the numerous shadows to be drawn. The GeForce 6800 also slows down in 1280x1024 and for the already trite reason – the same slow memory! The RADEON 9600 XT found itself behind the rest of the participants, and quite expectedly so – it has the slowest memory subsystem and the lowest geometry processing speed of all the graphics cards present.





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

Enabling FSAA and AF makes the gap between the RADEON X800 XT/Pro and the GeForce 6800 Ultra/GT wider. Even the GeForce 6800 finds itself capable of competing with ATI’s produce, although only in 1024x768. The RADEON 9800 XT lags behind the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra as well as the GeForce 6800. The GeForce FX 5700 Ultra loses the 1024x768 resolution to the RADEON 9600 XT but then outruns the competitor thanks to its fast 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 | 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