Final Words

Similar to Anand's 9700 Pro introduction, the GeForce 6800 has set some pretty solid standards. We can now expect:

1) Very high performance in current and future games.
2) The ability to play at 2048x1536 in just about any game currently available or soon to be made available, and
3) The ability to play virtually any game at 1600x1200 with 4X AA and 16X anisotropic filtering enabled at smooth frame rates.
Of course, we aren't crowning any kings yet, as ATI will soon be making its mark on this generation of GPUs. We will have to wait to find out what they can bring to the table, but it is definitely turning out to be an exciting battle. Even with the added power requirements, the kinds of performance gains we have seen are pretty substantial, and ATI will have a good fight on their hands.

We were able to achieve very smooth frame rates under Halo at 2048x1536, and 34fps under FarCry at the same resolution. Unfortuantely, the driver is currently not stable enough to do all the testing we wanted at this resolution, so we'll have to hold off on bringing a full set of benchmarks to the table until later.

Even though we have taken a cursory glance at anisotropic filtering and antialiasing, and we didn't notice any glaring problems while testing games, we will need to revisit the issue of image quality. We are planning on bringing out another image quality after ATI releases their card. One thing is for sure, both sides need to make sure they are generating the highest quality images to avoid recurrences of last years many controversies.

We are looking forward to the next month of battle, and we hope you are as excited as we are to see how this plays out.
X2: The Threat Performance
POST A COMMENT

76 Comments

View All Comments

  • TrogdorJW - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    There are a few things I take away from all the previews of the 6800 Ultra.

    One is that ATI is going to be hard pressed to actually top it. Both will have 16x1 designs, but I don't think ATI will have the 32x0 option, which might be important for games with lots of shadows. (I believe the ATI cards are going to be around 180 million transistors, which leads me to believe that they will not have quite as many features.) I also doubt that ATI will actually support fp32 this time around, which aces DX9.0c/PS3 support from them. That may or may not really matter.

    The next thing is sort of related to the first point: Nvidia now has more features that ATI, but there are still some bugs to work out. DX9 games that were optimized for NV3x seem to be dropping quality on the 6800U. Hopefully the fix to use fp32 instead of fp16 will be both easy and not result in a major performance drop. We'll have to wait and see, though. Other sites have shown quite a few areas that need driver revs, but that's nothing new. At least with NVidia, I feel confident their driver team will fix any major issues and probably increase performance a decent amount as well.

    I also agree with someone else that said the previews might be lower clocked than the final release. First, the RAM is spec'ed for 600 MHz, which makes it odd that they're running at 550 MHz. They may not hit 600, but 575 or maybe 585 seems likely (or at the very least that should be an OC'ing option). The core is currently at 400 MHz, and I think they might be able to bump that up a bit more, but 222 million transistors at .13 micron might not go much higher. We'll have to see what some of the shipping cards from GB, A-bit, Asus, etc. offer in terms of OC'ing headroom, as they might offer better cooling solutions.

    Related to the heat and clockspeed, I'm a little shocked at the heatsink/fan design. If they're going to all the trouble of having a huge HSF, I can't see any reason to not switch the direction it blows and have the Ultra version vent the hot air outside the case. Maybe noise was the reason, or component placement, but I would really prefer to have anything that size making use of external venting. It would be like having your power supply sucking air into the case instead of blowing out... Sure, it might cool the PS better, but the case temp would jump dramatically.

    My final thought is that it will be very interesting to see what sort of price and performance can be had from the regular 6800 cards, and even the 6800XT. I didn't think there would be a "soft-mod" option for Nvidia this round, but it appears I was wrong. Unless NVidia has some way of preventing this from being done. Regardless, if the 6800U is going to start at $500 and the 6800 will go for $300, we could be looking at a 6800XT for $200 or so. It should also have at least the performance of the 5950U, and most likely better.

    Incidentally, I'm betting the mid-range cards (i.e. 6500 or 6600 or whatever) will not really be that great, though, as they'll likely trim them down to 2 or 4 vertex pipelines and 4 or 8 pixel pipelines, so they'll end up looking like something inbetween the 5700U and the 5900XT. And don't look for help from ATI here, as the X300 and X600 look to be renamed 9600SE and 9600XT parts, respectively (a la the Radeon 9000 to 9200 line).
    Reply
  • IamTHEsnake - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Whoops! The Radeon 9800 xt only scored 6138 while NV40 scored 12350+ in 3DMark'03. That Ladies and Gentlemen is 2x as many points! Reply
  • IamTHEsnake - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Wow I read the review and all I can say is WoW. I read somewhere else that this card scored 12250+ in 3dMark'03 while the 9800 xt scored 8350 on the same system, same set-up. From one generation to the next 33% increase is not bad. not bad at all.


    Come on ATi! I'm rootin' for you!!!
    Reply
  • Schadenfroh - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    what mobo and mobo drivers were used? i hear that the nforce2 provides an unfair performance advantage for nvidia, even tho the ati should run at the same speed as on a differant motherboard, nvidia just gets an extra boost Reply
  • Warder45 - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    I want to see the multimedia bench's. Hopefully another article with AMD vs Intel. Reply
  • AlexWade - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    The thing is freakin' huge! I'm willing to bet dollars-to-doughnuts that ATI's new card isn't the size of a football. Even if this huge beast tops in performance, the extra 20 pounds rules out LAN parties.

    I'll admit, the performance is great. But if ATI is smaller and performs near, or slightly below, then that is the one to buy.
    Reply
  • AlexWade - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    The thing is freakin' huge! I'm willing to bet dollars-to-doughnuts that ATI's new card isn't the size of a football. Even if this huge beast tops in performance, the extra 20 pounds rules out LAN parties.

    I'll admit, the performance is great. But if ATI is smaller and performs near, or slightly below, then that is the one to buy.
    Reply
  • Reflex - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Personally I'll wait to see the budget line on these, I refuse to spend more than $200 on a video card. Chances are I'll end up going Ati however, the 2D video quality is just noticably better, and most of my time on my PC is spent reading, not gaming.

    Oh well, at least the gamers can be happy again. Too bad the AGP slot is not at the bottom of the motherboard, could build some interesting external vented cases if the card could stick that fan outside the case. ;)
    Reply
  • Reliant - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Any ideas how the Non Ultra version will perform? Reply
  • Reliant - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Any ideas how the Non Ultra version will perform? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now