Information

X-bit Labs for mobile users! Do not forget that we are running a special version of X-bit Labs web-site for users of mobile and handheld devices: http://pda.xbitlabs.com. Check out our news and articles from smartphones and PDAs to be always updated on the latest computer and technology news.

 

Articles: Video

The Fast and Furious: ATI Radeon X1900 XTX Review (page 12)


Category: Video

by Anton Shilov , Alexey Stepin

[ 01/24/2006 | 08:28 PM ]


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

Vertex Shader Performance

As in case of pixel shaders 1.1, vertex shader 1.1 test shows that performance is limited by something else than vertex shader performance of the modern VPUs.

Approximately 660 thousand triangles are skinned in each frame using vertex shaders 1.1. As we see, there is virtually no scaling across resolutions, which means that the test is actually limited by vertex shader performance, or, at least, something else related to vertex shaders. Generally, the Radeon X1900 XT is ahead here, even though the gap could be larger keeping in mind the 100MHz clock-speed difference between the newbie and the GeForce 7800 GTX 512.

Short and simple vertex shaders 2.0 are performed pretty well by all high-eng graphics cards today, but the Radeon X1900 XTX seems to be notably ahead of the competition due to high clock-speeds.

The same vertex shader 2.0 from the 3DMark06 benchmark, however, performs notably better on the Nvidia GeForce 7800 GTX 512 hardware and slight better on the Radeon X1800 XT GPU. We do not know the reason for that, as Futuremark claims in its documents (1, 2) that these shaders are identical. Moreover, it is unclear which result is correct for Nvidia GPU.

There is no difference between 3DMark05 and 3DMark06 for the case of the complex vertex shader 2.0:

The gap between the Radeon X1900 XTX and the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 has shrunk significantly compared to the previous case in the 3DMark05, even though the former still maintains lead. The reason for that may be the central processing unit that calculates fractal noise for this test scene, even though Futuremark believes that CPU impact here is negligible.

<<< Previous page Next page >>>

Discussion

Comments currently: 3
Discussion started: 01/31/07
View comments

Add your Comment

Name/Nickname
Your Comments
 

Category News

Category: Video

Friday, July 4, 2008

3:08 pm Nvidia Plans Further Price-Cuts for Latest Graphics Cards. Nvidia Intends to Drop Price of GeForce GTX 200-Series Graphics Cards

Thursday, July 3, 2008

9:27 pm Transition to 16:9 PC Monitor Panels Inevitable – Research Firm. 16:9 Panels to Replace 16:10 Panels, Says Research Firm

4:07 pm Nvidia Lowers Sales Guidance amid Chipset Flaws and Decreasing Prices of Graphics Chips. Nvidia Issues Warning Following Issues with Chipsets, Graphics Processors

Tuesday, July 1, 2008

1:46 pm Diamond Multimedia Preps Über-Overclocked ATI Radeon HD 4870 Graphics Card. ATI, Diamond Bid on Overclocked ATI Radeon HD 4870 to Crash Nvidia’s GeForce 200 GTX

Monday, June 30, 2008

4:32 pm AMD Returns ATI All-In-Wonder Graphics Cards to Market. AMD Unveils ATI All-In-Wonder HD Graphics Card

 
News Archive
All Latest News