RV360 vs. NV36: Synthetic Benchmarks

Following the well-trodden path, we start out with fillrate tests using different FSAA modes. Thus, we will get a notion of how the GPU handles the ever-increasing workload.

Well, the standard work mode brings quite standard results. The GeForce FX 5700 Ultra is much faster than its predecessor, GeForce FX 5600. The difference between the new and old RADEON based cards is negligible.

Multi-texturing adds something new to the picture: the high frequency of the graphics core allows the RADEON 9600 XT to show the best performance. The GeForce FX 5700 Ultra starts bravely enough, but soon gives up as the FSAA level grows. The GeForce FX 5600 Ultra behaves much alike, although takes the FSAA easier – its graph is flatter.

As you know, besides 3DMark 2001SE, we have a special test program, which draws a polygon and renders 0 to 4 textures (512x512 pixels resolution) onto it. That is, we see no texture at all in the first case and the pixel’s color is calculated by interpolation of the colors of the polygon’s vertices. The program serves for testing the graphics card in three modes. The first mode: color and Z writes are enabled:

The cards on the NVIDIA GPUs are doing quite fine, but too easily give in in the end: when the number of the textures is high, the GPU switches to the inconvenient 2x2 formula (2 pipelines with 2 TMUs per each). Interestingly, the cards on ATI chips show practically the same performance with no and with one texture.

Now, we enable Z writes:

And see that nothing has changed, really.