Black and White 2 Performance

Black and White 2 is a god sim with a very sophisticated graphics and physics engine. One thing very interesting about this game is the advanced in-game Anti-Aliasing option. While, only offering "low", "medium" and "high" AA settings, the game's AA looks surprisingly good, as we will show under the image quality section.

Here with Black and White 2, NVIDIA does quite a bit better than ATI. It would be an understatement to say that this game favors NVIDIA over ATI due to the before-mentioned problem ATI has with this game. Not only do the 1900s perform much lower than the GTX (without AA), but the performance actually becomes worse when Crossfire is enabled. Keep in mind though that ATI has promised a patch, and this issue will hopefully be resolved soon.

Also, Black and White 2 just happens to be possibly the most graphically intensive of our games in this review, so NVIDIA's parts struggle at high resolutions and with AA significantly. This game appears to put even the mighty 7800 GTX 512 sli setup to task, but we still see a playable framerate at the highest resolution with AA enabled. Note that we did not include maximum quality tests here because the in-game AA did a far greater job at image quality with not nearly the same drop in performance.

Black and White 2 - No AA

Black and White 2 - High AA



Battlefield 2 Performance Day of Defeat Performance
Comments Locked

120 Comments

View All Comments

  • Harkonnen - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Almost $900 CDN for the XTX and it only has a 1 year warranty?

    Main reason I would never buy an expensive ATi card is that right there.
  • smitty3268 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    The people who buy a card this expensive the first day it comes out won't keep it for a whole year, so the warranty doesn't matter. In 6 months another card will be out that makes this one look slow and they'll be spending even more money.
  • DerekWilson - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Due to popular demand, we have added more percent increase performance comparison graphs to the performance breakdown that shows the performance relatoinships at lower resolutions.

    Let us know if there is anything else you'd like to see. Thanks!
  • Live - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    The performance breakdown looks very good now! I would go so far as to say that this should be standard in future reviews.
  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Using a lossy image format (JPEG) for image quality comparison screenshots seems kind of... pointless.

    But I guess you have to worry about bandwidth.
  • Josh Venning - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Thanks for the input all. Just to let you know we are dealing with some problems regarding our power numbers, but they should be up shortly. Thanks for being patient.
  • Josh Venning - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    One more thing.. We also caught a mistype on the graphs that we are in the process of correcting. The two crossfire systems we tested are the X1900 XTX Crossfire and the X1800 XT Crossfire. (we miss-labeled the latter "X1900 XT Crossfire") Sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
  • smitty3268 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Ah... That makes much more sense now. I was wondering why the XTX crossfire was doing so much better than the XT crossfire when the specs were so similar.
  • SpaceRanger - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Just to let you know we are dealing with some problems regarding our power numbers


    Problems with the publishing of them, or problems in the sense that it requires a direct link into a nuclear reactor to power properly??
  • DerekWilson - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    our local nuclear plant ran us an extention cord just for this event :-)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now