X600 128

As you can see with the x600, there are some significant gains here. The most notable is with Half-Life 2 at16x12 with AA, which increases by exactly 25%. FarCry at 16x12 without AA goes up by 20.2% with Catalyst 5.7, and probably would have shown to increase even more with AA enabled, if we could have ran the benchmark. That's were we encounter the problem. While these are impressive gains, they still aren't very playable at 16x12 with AA on this card. At 12x10, however, HL2 and FarCry saw some decent gains: HL2 with AA, and FarCry without AA both went up by about 14%. But these were the only things that the driver upgrade seemed to help. With the other settings in HL2 and FarCry, as well as all the UT framerates, the increases were just not enough to be significant. Note that FarCry at 1600x1200 with AA enabled was not playable. Therefore, they were not included on the graph.

Radeon X600 128

Radeon X600 128

Radeon X600 128

Radeon X600 128


HyperMemory X800 XT 256
Comments Locked

23 Comments

View All Comments

  • nserra - Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - link

    Why no one see if Ati claims are true?

    Well Why not test with the 6X AA....

    Maybe enabling AF will not make the same difference as not enabling it....

    Also I don’t understand the deal with always 4X AA.

    I play almost all games with no AA, or 2X AA with Temporal AA enabled and 4X AF or 8X. Some times I lower Mipmap Detail Level option to Quality because almost all games give 0% image quality difference. I do that with DOOM3 and got almost 5% performance increase.
  • Jeff7181 - Sunday, August 14, 2005 - link

    ... memory optimizations help most when the memory is the limit. Nice to get some free performance... too bad you have to have a crappy card with crappy frame rates to begin with in order to see that free performance.
  • Rand - Saturday, August 13, 2005 - link

    It would have been nice had you tested how this impacted AGP and PCI-E graphics cards respectively, you commented that it should of course provide a greater benefit over PCI-E.

    Assuming you don't have any motherboards natively supporting PCI-E and AGP (Not the neutered AGP over PCI) you could have used an nForce 3 and nForce 4 board, given they perform quite similarly.
    Any chance of doing any such tests?

    On another note- what system did you test the cards on anyway?
    I don't believe you made any mention of the system configuration, it's always beneficial to know the system specifications.
  • OvErHeAtInG - Saturday, August 13, 2005 - link

    I did some extensive comparison benching with HL2 with 5.6 and 5.7 drivers. I run a 128MB 9800 Pro, 430/370, on a 4x AGP mobo, P4 2.85, 1GB DDR400 SC.

    I can second what they said about the 9700 Pro, as I had similar results. I play HL2 at 1280x1024, no AA. The only performance increases (as ATI specifies) come at that res and above WITH AA/AF enabled - which you do NOT play at with a 9800 pro.

    So, in other words, certain res/settings go from "unplayable" to "almost playable." Which is VERY impressive, but useless. I did see a 35-82% increase in frames (much larger than what AT got):

    HardwareOC Coast at 12x10, 4x8x:
    Catalyst 5.6: 36.3 fps
    Catalyst 5.7: 52.1 fps

    HardwareOC d13c17 at 12x10, 4x8x:
    Catalyst 5.6: 20.8 fps
    Catalyst 5.7: 37.9 fps

    At playable settings, we get a SLIGHT decrease in performance:

    Guru3d Demo4 12x10 noAAnoAF
    Catalyst 5.6: 103.3 fps
    Catalyst 5.7: 100.3 fps
  • Shadowmage - Sunday, August 14, 2005 - link

    Of course, this depends on what you call "playable" and "unplayable".

    For me, anything above 40fps is considered extremely playable.
  • OvErHeAtInG - Sunday, August 14, 2005 - link

    Yes... if it stays above 40 fps :p
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, August 13, 2005 - link

    Strange... I took almost no performance hit when enabling 4xAF on my old 9800Pro with HL2. (I don't have it anymore, sorry - no new benches.) Going from 1024x768 to 4xAA brought less than a 5% decrease in FPS, while 1280x1024 was about a 30% performance decrease. Enabling 4xAA at 1280x1024 was another 5 to 10% loss. Of course, that was last year with 4.10 or so Cats, so I don't know what happened in the intervening time.
  • OvErHeAtInG - Sunday, August 14, 2005 - link

    4xAF only? Never tried it. Probably keeps it playable.

    I was using the HardwareOC benches at the time which seem to get held back by my CPU (which is weird), that's why I was running 12x10 4x8x to stress the card.

    At 10x7, one can run AA AF on this card, but not 12x10... if it's still smooth enough for you, different strokes different folks
  • pxc - Saturday, August 13, 2005 - link

    Performance went up on my XPRESS 200M 128MB w/HM laptop when I disabled the HyperMemory in the registry. :p I got rid of it before Cat 5.7 came out, so maybe the HM performance problems were fixed.
  • AlexWade - Saturday, August 13, 2005 - link

    ATI has had final 64-bit drivers for a while. Is it possible to benchmark those compared to the same 32-bit?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now