Half-Life 2 Performance - e3_bugbait.dem

Under this demo, the GeForce4 Ti 4600 steps up to the plate and comes in as a third place winner. Once again, remember that out of the entire bunch, the visual quality on the Ti 4600 would be the worst here as it is using the baseline DX8.0 (pixel shader 1.1) code path.

The Radeon 9800 and 9700 Pro both take the lead, outperforming the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra by around 32% here. The Radeon 9600 Pro manages to offer extremely good bang for your buck, slightly outperforming the 5900 Ultra.

The performance gap grows to be a massive 61% advantage for the Radeon 9800 Pro over the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra at 1280x1024.

Half-Life 2 Performance - e3_techdemo_5.dem Half-Life 2 Performance - e3_c17_02.dem


View All Comments

  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    another thing i just noticed looking at the doom 3 and hl2 benchies.

    take a look at the performance of 9800pro and 9600pro...

    in hl2, the 9800pro is about 27% ahead of the 9600pro, in doom 3 the 9800pro is near 50% faster than the 9600pro. the whole thing just feels weird.

  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    I'm surprised that Anand mentioned nothing about the comparisons between 4x2 and 8x1 pipelines? Does he even know that MS is working to included paired textures with simutainious wait states for the nV arcitexture? You see the DX9 SDK was developed thinking only one path and since each texture has a defined FIFO during the pass the second pipe in the nV is dormant until the first pipe FIFO operation is complete, with paired textures in the pipe using syncronus wait states this 'problem' will be greatly relieved. Reply
  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    its fake.... HL2 test are not ready today , great fake Anandtech :) Reply
  • rogerw99 - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    Ooo Ooo Ooo... I know the answer to that one.
    It was Mrs. White, but it wasn't with the gun, it was the lead pipe.
  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    ATI The Way It Should Be Played Reply
  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    Quote: 'So why is it that in the age of incredibly fast, absurdly powerful DirectX 9 hardware do we find it necessary to bicker about everything but the hardware? Because, for the most part, we've had absolutely nothing better to do with this hardware.'

    Don't we? Wrong!


  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    one thing that i think is kinda interesting. check out this benchmark hardocp did - fx5900 ultra vs. radeon 9800 pro in doom 3 (with help from id software).


    after reading this, read carmack's Jan 03 .plan, where he states that under the default openGL codepath, the fx architecture is about half as fast as the r300 - something that is pretty much resembled in the hl2 benchmarks. furthermore he states that using the default path the r300 is clearly superior (+100%), but when converting to vendor-specific codepaths, the fx series is the clear winner.

    conclusions? none, but some possibilities
    .) ati is better in directx, nvidia in opengl
    .) id can actually code, valve cannot
    .) and your usual conspiracy theories, feel free to use one you specifically like

    bottom line. neither ati nor nvidia cards are the "right ones" at the moment, wait for the next generation of video cards and upgrade THEN.

  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    I'm so glad i converted to Ati, i have never regret it & now it feels even better. Ati rules Reply
  • notoriousformula - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    i'm sure Nvidia will strike back.. prolly with DOOM III..well till then i'll enjoy my little army of ATI cards: ATI 9800NP>PRO, ATI 9700, ATI 9600PRO :P..long live ATI!!! :D Reply
  • Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link

    Anand should have benchmarked on a more widely used computer like a 2400 or 2500+ AMD. Who here has the money to buy a p4 3Gb 8000mhz FSB cpu? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now