Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy

Released in 2003, Jedi Academy represents the pinnacle of what the Quake3 engine could offer. With massive levels, dynamic glow, and lightsabers abound, it's one of the most punishing Quake3 engine games ever made, and a good representation of the vast number of games made in the early 2000's with this engine. As our only OpenGL title in this roundup, it's also our gauge to see if ATI's OpenGL performance changed at all over the 3-year period That said, even with ATI's traditionally poor OpenGL performance, we still had to increase our testing resolution to 1600x1200 in order to put a sizable dent in to our test setup; otherwise, we would continuously hit the 100fps frame rate cap.

Jedi Academy

Jedi Academy HQ

As the Quake 3 engine was already 3+ years old at the time of the earliest drivers, it should come as no surprise that there is not much variation to speak of here either with or without AA/AF. Even with that, we can see that ATI still managed to work in one significant performance improvement in between the Catalyst 3.00 and 3.04 driver sets, with a 10% frame rate increase. The numbers are a bit more mixed with AA/AF enabled, but even here, the peak performance difference is a very noticeable 14%.

Looking at the screen captures, however, we see a very interesting story that the benchmarks do not show, and it's not all performance related.



Catalyst 3.04 versus 3.00 (mouse over to see 3.00)

The performance improvements that we saw between the 3.00 and 3.04 drivers appear to have been completely free, as there is no difference between the two images. Comparing the 3.06 and 3.09 drivers, however...



Catalyst 3.09 versus 3.06 (mouse over to see 3.06)

Unlike the earlier comparison, there is a very noticeable IQ difference between the 3.06 and 3.09 drivers, but looking at our charts, there is no such difference in performance. This is a prime example of how drivers aren't just about performance improvements, as the IQ difference is the result of a bug fix by ATI with dynamic glow. On drivers previous to 3.09, the JA team had to use a hack to get around a bug in ATI's drivers, causing the inferior image quality seen above. These hacks are not used in drivers 3.09 and later, and as we can see, ATI was able to fix the bug without a performance hit. There was no further change to IQ after the 3.09 drivers.

Overall, however, Jedi Academy shows that other than early improvements and a bug fix, there was little change in performance in this game with the 9700 Pro.

D3DAFTester Unreal Tournament 2004
Comments Locked

58 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Sunday, December 11, 2005 - link

    With this article series, we're especially looking for feedback guys. We can't test every last game under the sun because of how long it would take, but if there's something you guys would like to see and a good reason for it, we'd like to hear about it for possible inclusion in a future regression.
  • Questar - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link

    Feedback?

    Learn to proofread.
  • Cygni - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link

    Feedback?

    Dont be an asshole.
  • Scrogneugneu - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link

    I would like to see that kind of test on another, more recent card.

    Why? Simply to test what the first driver revisions do in term of performance. The article already shows that later in the driver's life, there is little improvement made on performance... but that on early drivers, there is usually a good jump. Could it be possible to test with a newer card, with the drivers available at launch and up from there?

    That way we could have a better idea of what to expect when we hear ATI or NVidia saying "we will optimise the drivers after the launch". Does every optimisation happens in the first release, the second, the five first... what release usually brings the best improvements, both on IQ and FPS?


    Could be nice to see such an article :)
  • timmiser - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link

    I don't think that would work because the older drivers (ie-Cat 3.0, Cat 4.0) won't support the newer card.
  • Scrogneugneu - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link

    Well, if you use the drivers available at the launch of the card up to the current release, I'm pretty sure they will all be compatible with the card, won't they? ;)

    The goal is not to see what improvements were made with Catalyst 3.0 to 5.12, but to see what improvements were made from the first driver available for the card to the latest. More importantly, to see WHEN were they made.
  • timmiser - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link

    Well yes, you could do that, but then you have just a typical article about driver improvements over the last 5 or 6 months which every hardware site has done over and over again. What makes this article unique is they take an older video card and review older drivers so that we can see the driver improvement effect over the span of years instead of months.
  • Scrogneugneu - Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - link

    By more recent card, I didn't mean a ATI X1x00 card or a NVidia 7x00.

    I was more talking about something like the Xx00 series. These cards have seen a great number of driver release, and are still pretty recent.


    Besides, this article showed us that the only improvements seen were generally at the early stage of the development of the drivers, or at that least later in the works, there's not much difference. So, we can assume that a year of different driver revisions would be enough to show us what kind of improvements are made.
  • timmiser - Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - link

    Exactly, which is all information we didn't know until this article showed that.
  • oopyseohs - Sunday, December 11, 2005 - link

    The Athlon64 you used was socket 754, not 757. =]

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now