Articles: Graphics
 

Bookmark and Share

(5) 
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 ]
Game 1

The CPU obviously interferes with the results of the first test and the performance of CrossFire-linked Radeon X1800 XT cards that yielded no more than 42fps was a confirmation of this fact. The HyperZ unit has been improved in the Radeon X1900 XTX and it also uses the Fetch4 feature, so its performance goes down less quickly in higher resolutions than that of the Radeon X1800 XT. As the result, the new Radeon wins this test.

Game 2

It’s all roughly the same in the second test: the Radeon X1900 XTX provides about the maximum performance available on a platform with an Athlon 64 4000+ processor in 1600x1200 while the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 and the Radeon X1800 XT are 20-25% behind it. The new card is also about 20% faster than its main opponent in the “eye candy” mode.

Game 3

With its complex and numerous pixel shaders, the third game test is a greater stress exactly for the graphics processor, so the Radeon X1900 XTX shows its best, leaving the older Radeon and the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 far behind.

The new Radeon X1900 XTX has no rivals among single ultra-high-end graphics cards at the “pure speed” as well as “eye candy” settings. In the latter case the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 gets closer to the leader due to faster 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 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 5
Discussion started: 01/31/07 11:35:14 AM
Latest comment: 07/10/08 09:05:40 PM

View comments

Add your Comment