F1 Challenge '99-'02 Performance

Anisotropic filtering really helps in this game because since you are at such a steep angle to the ground it makes it look a lot more crisp. Smoke and dust from other cars are fairly realistic, and the texures of the scenery look better than average for a racing game. This game may not be DX 9, but the smoke and dust (blending) do have an impact on performance.

60% faster without AA (67% with 4xAA/8xAF) than NV38 in F1 Challenge is definitely not shabby. This kind of performance gain is more like it, and we are seeing nearly 2x the performance of the venerable 9700 Pro.
Aquamark 3 Performance Final Fantasy XI Performance
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Marsumane - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    This card owns... Anyone know when it ships to retail stores? Guesses even?
  • SpaceRanger - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    I'd like to see what ATI comes up with before I make my decision. I rushed to judgement back when the GF4 TI4600 came out, and regretted making the quick call to buy. If I don't have to get a new PSU for the ATI solution, I'll consider it, even if performance is 5-10FPS slower. Adding 100 bucks to the already costly 500 for the card doesn't justify the expenditure.
  • gordon151 - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    AtaStrumf is so right. More than likely you'll be able to buy the X800s before you can buy this.
  • Shinei - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    Well, I'm sold. Yeah, that sounds fanboyish, but this thing is a solid performer and doesn't require me to completely replace my display drivers... Even if ATI wins by five FPS and has a lens flare in a forgotten corner of a screenshot that you have to stare at for ten minutes to spot, my money is going to NV40--assuming the prices come down a little. ;)
    Speaking of DX9/PS2.0, what about a Max Payne 2 benchmark? I'm curious what NV40 can do on that game with maxed out everything... :)
  • skiboysteve - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    i love anandtech's deep technical reviews but yall did no where near enough testing, the xbit article does a hell of allot more testing, 48 pages!


    the card fucking rapes everything.

    the anand tests dont show nearly the rape the xbit ones do...
  • AtaStrumf - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    I find it really funny when people say that they will wait until ATi releases their X800 to make up their buying decisions.

    It's not you can run out and BUY this card right now or tomorrow. Of yourse you will wait. You don't really have a choice :)
  • ChronoReverse - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    The Techreport tested out the total power draw of this thing and it only drew slightly higher than the 5950 (both of which draws more than the 9800XT).

    So it seems the recommendation isn't actually necessary (and my Enermax enhanced 12V lines will take it easily).
  • Pete - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    mkruer #27, all the reviews I've read mention $500 for the 6800U, and $299 for a 12-pipe 128MB 6800.
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link


    The 6800 Ultra (which we tested) will be priced at $500

    The 6800 (with 12 pipes rather than 16) will be priced at $300
  • Pete - Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - link

    quikah #26: FarCry comparison screens are at HOCP.


    Apparently PS3 wasn't enabled, but the 6800U looks better than the 5950U running PS2. It's still uglier than the 9800XT, sadly. Banding abounds, both here and in FiringSquad's Lock-On screens. Puzzling, really. If the 6800U really runs FP32 as fast as FP16 within memory limits, I wonder if all it will take to get IQ on a level with ATi is forcing the 6800U to run the ATi path or removing the NV3x path's _pp hints.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now