Battlefield 2

As the newest game in our latest investigation, Battlefield 2 is almost too new to include. With only a handful of drivers released in the lifetime of the game, there’s a lack of data points to work with to draw a strong conclusion, but given the number of requests to include this game, we have included it anyhow. As a primarily large multiplayer game, Battlefield 2 strikes an interesting balance between the desire for high quality graphics and the need to be able to render a large firefight without slowing a system to a crawl. Battlefield 2 also is a unique game out of everything that we’ve tested because it’s the only game here that requires pixel shading, whereas everything else merely uses the ability if it’s there.

Battlefield 2

Battlefield 2 HQ

In spite of the lack of data points, the performance graph for Battlefield 2 is surprisingly boring. Outside of a performance improvement with the 5.07 drivers, the first drivers released after the game was launched, there’s a distinct lack of performance improvements. Considering how brutal that this game is, specifically, we would have expected a larger and more continuous performance improvement.


Catalyst 5.05 versus 6.01 (mouse over to see 5.05)

Looking at the screenshot comparison, there’s no change in image quality, which again is what we would expect given the lack of a performance change. We are, however, still intrigued by the game’s poor, blocky shadowing for such a modern title.

Half-Life 2 3dMark 2005
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • breethon - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    I never download the "FULL" package drivers from ATI. I always use the option "dial up - driver only"(the first of three options under the dial up links). I use atitool for any tweaking. I don't have the CCC (atleast I don't believe I do). Don't let the dial-up words trick you. I pull from ati.com just as fast as the broadband links. Hopefully this helps.
  • archcommus - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    I'll admit the CCC takes a long time to load and is bloated, but if you disable it from startup and don't mess with the settings much, it's really not that bad.
  • microAmp - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    If you search the Far Cry forums, there is a way to do a quick save, through the console, IIRC.
  • archcommus - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    Yes, I wouldn't even bother playing the game without doing that, don't care for repeating things endlessly.
  • wing0 - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    from all the comparison for 9700Pro, it seems to me that I should stick with my 5.7 cat?
  • Cybercat - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    I do see a change in the shadows under the dock. I don't know if you could say it's better or worse though.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    That's actually fog. We couldn't get an exactly perfect screenshot because of the rolling fog(though we kept the scene because it does a good job showing everything), so there is a slight difference due to that. There are no differences however due to driver IQ changes.
  • tfranzese - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    But is the CCC the cause of the increased boot time or is it the .NET Framework in general? I've never given CCC any use personally, just want to be sure that the distinction was made when you took the measurements.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    It was the CCC, the machine already had the .NET framework on it.
  • Scrogneugneu - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link

    Yeah, but is the slowdown caused by the CCC itself, or by the .NET components loading because there was a .NET application launched?


    I believe the Framework won't load itself until one application requires it. If the CCC happens to be that application, then there's not much ATI can do about it. However, if it isn't... then they should definitively take a look at that (I'd rater have a better CCC than a "half-a-fps" faster driver).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now