Fall 2003 Video Card Roundup - Part 2: High End Shootout
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on October 7, 2003 5:30 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness Performance no AA
Since we are looking at percent decrease in performance with PS2.0, we should be able to get a good idea of how each card responds to the PS2.0 code in the game. I know everyone will want to take these numbers and say that they universally describe the DX9 performance hit on NVIDIA hardware, but we have had plenty of other benchmarks today that show very different results. In the end, so much of performance comes down to how the game was coded, and what is actually going on. Without further ado:
From this we can see that ATIs performance doesn't drop as much as NVIDIAs when PS2.0 is enabled. These are some very interesting numbers even though they have come out as we expected them too. Essentially, what these numbers have done is eliminated many of the outside factors that could have contributed to poor performance and focused on the PS2.0 code alone. We can now clearly see what everyone suspected: ATI handles rendering PS2.0 effects much more efficiently than NVIDIAs cards in TRAOD. Please remember that the context of the previous sentence is completely dependant on the inclusion of the final prepositional phrase.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
117 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
Wasn't Anand allowed to use ShaderMark v2.0 for det. the pixel shader performace?Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
lol read this article take me a 1/2 hour. this article is great but it can be improvedAnonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
why anand didnt review bf1942 :(Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
why is anand bashing Tomb raiderand whats up with PS 2.0 graph
why not just post the fps, makes it seem
like nvidia is beating Ati. Also why are beta drivers being tested with nvidia. Should have used
cat 3.8 for Radeon.
Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
im still waiting that a site post a review for an 9600 XTPete - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
Overall, a good read. Thanks, Derek and Anand.Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
im not biased towards either card. i myself own a 9800pro. what concerns me is the immaturity shown by other ATI card owners. you guys act like nvidia can never measure up to ATI (which is so untrue). there was none/little difference in the IQ and benchmark results (with few exceptions, but explanations were given for the most part). also keep in mind that the 9800xt specs are higher than the 5900/5950 and it still managed to get beat in some of the tests. anyway, good job nvidia. you guys are certainly headed in the right direction. i was a bit sad to see my card excluded though :( ... they said they'll benchmark the value cards soon...i hope to see mine there ;)ps: i could be wrong about the specs, but i do remember anand saying the XT had higher memory bandwidth (which could've accounted for some performance differences).
all in all, a good review, ill be waiting for more updates.
Anonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
18, he says he saw it saw it, he doesnt know why it was there, there is no reason to exclude regular fps graphs, especially since people want to know the fps of this game, since it is the ONLY truly dx9 game in the entire suiteAnonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
Hey Anand did nvidias check arrive yetAnonymous User - Tuesday, October 7, 2003 - link
Haha, yet again, we see fanATIcs (#10, #14) coming out of the woodworks to claim that Anandtech's review is either biased or NVIDIA is still cheating. lmao, losers!And by the way #14, you're plain dumb if you couldn't figure out that the TR:AOD graphs were showing a percentage difference. Christ, read the review.