Unreal Tournament 2003

Everyone knows Unreal Tournament 2003 as a benchmark, and everyone has optimized the stuffing out of it. People play it like a religion, and we'll do the same from the testing side.

ATI's hardware takes the lead in the flyby benchmark but not by much.

The XT just pulls ahead to a greater percentage lead when AA/AF are enabled. Of course, NV38 moves ahead of everything else in the pack, but the XT is the clear leader.

Splinter Cell X2
Comments Locked

263 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    #112, just because doom3 is opengl and not dx9 it doesnt change the fact that this review completely sidestepped the issue of future performance in games. #92 makes perfect points apart from the discrepancy over doom3 using dx9, which ultimately doesnt matter since the shaders of its opengl API are similar to dx9 anyway.

    YOU are the only person that looks stupid if you think that this review hasnt glazed over or sidestepped important issues, most benchmarks were totally CPU limited and an unreleased nvidia driver was used which might not even see the light of day.

    I'm glad that you point out to everyone that IQ will be covered in later articles, its always great to see reviews posted claiming a certain level of performance without backing up scores legitimately! That would never give people false impressions now would it?
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    - why not try more distributed forms of the review process. 30hrs in a row is quite bad and it's obviosuly going to impact a bit in terms of any sensible decisions to make during the benchmarking and comment-making.

    username/login aint workin!

    Last 3 posts were mine.

    Gaurav Sharma
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    - Dunno if you're allowed to answer this, but is the prescott a hot chip compared to a P4? if its got HT2 and things, again it could be painting an innaccurate picture. Im sure most people here have a Athlon 2xxx and that's what you shoulda benchmarked with. Also you left out too many old cards - what use is a comparision when your card aint on there?!
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    - Benchmark at 1280x1024 with 4x AA, it's what these cards are designed for, especially with regard to DX8 titles. With DX9 same thing but without AA. I'm sure most of us are running our CRTs/17-18" LCDs at that.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    Shut your stupid pie-hole!
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    Why use FRAPS for Jedi Knight when the game has the ability to record and play back demos? just use timedemo1 as in all (well almost) other Q3 based games
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    Well Like I have always said Even when the 9000 was out you knew that it would blow away the fx5800
    and now we see even the 9600 beating the mess out of the poor 5900-ultra!

    ATI Rocks man!

    I'm out of here, but I'll be back!
    Bigshot
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    a lot of people dont have the time to spend hours reading hardware reviews, for those people reviews such as this one can be very misleading when such important details are glazed over or completely missing.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    #143, yes, that's true; if you don't know how to read a review and only see numbers because you are a moron, then yes those people are in bad luck...
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    #142: true, but people read this review and dont see where the image quality suffers; they just see the performance.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now