Our Settings

We tested at two major settings, one we defined as High Quality and the other we called Medium Quality. The settings were as follows:

 Oblivion Performance Settings High Quality  Medium Quality
Resolution 1280x1024 1024x768
Texture Size Large Medium
Tree Fade 50% 25%
Actor Fade 65% 50%
Item Fade 65% 50%
Object Fade 65% 50%
Grass Distance 50% 25%
View Distance 100% 100%
Distant Land On On
Distant Buildings On On
Distant Trees On Off
Interior Shadows 50% 30%
Exterior Shadows 50% 30%
Self Shadows On Off
Shadows on Grass On Off
Tree Canopy Shadows On Off
Shadow Filtering High Low
Specular Distance 50% 50%
HDR Lighting On On
Bloom Lighting Off Off
Water Detail High Normal
Water Reflections On On
Water Ripples On On
Window Reflections On On
Blood Decals High Low
Anti-aliasing Off Off

Note that when we talk about a setting being 65% we mean that the slider is moved 65% of the way to the right. As you can see from the table above, our High Quality settings aren't as extreme as they could be and the Medium Quality settings are more suited for upper mid-range cards. Since we were dealing with such a wide spread of GPUs we had to err on the side of being more stressful in our visual settings, especially in the mid-range, in order to adequately characterize the performance of all of the GPUs. We didn't want to end up with a graph where everything performed the same because we were too lax with our detail settings.

At the end of the day, these two configurations are what we would strive for in order to get good performance while maintaining a good gameplay experience.

High End Settings


Click to Enlarge

Mid Range Settings


Click to Enlarge

Note that the ATI Radeon X850/X800 series of GPUs don't support Shader Model 3.0, which is required for HDR in Oblivion. Thus we had to leave the X850/X800 out of our default tests with HDR enabled and ran a second set of configurations with HDR disabled and Bloom enabled.

Index Setting Expectations & The Test
Comments Locked

100 Comments

View All Comments

  • smitty3268 - Friday, April 28, 2006 - link

    Well, all the tests that had the XT ahead of the XTX were obviously CPU bound, so for all intents and purposes you should have read the performance as being equal.

    I would like to know a bit about the drivers though. Were you using Catalyst AI and does it make a difference?
  • coldpower27 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    Quite a nice post there, well said Jarred.
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    LOL - a Bolivian = Oblivion. Thanks, Dragon! :D (There are probably other typos as well. Sorry.)
  • alpha88 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    Opteron 165, 7800GTX 256meg

    I run at 1920x1200 with every ingame setting set to max, HDR, no AA, (16x AF)

    The game runs just fine.

    I don't know what the framerates are, but whatever they are, it's very playable.

    I have a few graphics mods installed (new textures), and the graphics are good enough that I randomly stop and take screenshots, the view looked so awesome.
  • z3R0C00L - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    The game is a glimpse at the future of gaming. The 7x00 series is old. True, nVIDIA were able to remain competitive with revamped 7800's which they now call 7900's but consumers need to remember that these cards have a smaller die space for a reason... they offer less features, less performance and are not geared towards HDR gaming.

    Right now nVIDIA and ATi have a complete role reversal from the x800XT PE vs. 6800 Ultra. The 6800 Ultra performed on par or beat the x800XT PE. The kick was that the 6800 Ultra produced more heat (larger die) was louder (larger cooler) but had more features and was more forward looking. Right now we have the same thing.

    ATi's x1900 series has a larger die, produces more heat (larger die means more voltage to operate) and comes with a larger cooler. The upside is that it's a better card. The x1900 series totally dominate the 7900 series. Some will argue about OpenGL others will point to inexistant flaws in ATi drivers... the truth is those who make these comments on both sides are hardware fans. Product wise.. the x1900 series should be the card you buy if you're looking for a highend card... if you're looking more towards the middle of the market the x1800XT is better then the 7900GT.

    Remember performance, features and technology.. the x1k series has all of them above the 7x00 series. Larger die space.. more heat. Larger die space.. more features.

    Heat/Power for features and performance... hmmm fair tradeoff if you ask me.
  • aguilpa1 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    inefficient game programming is no excuse to go out and spend 1200 on a graphics system. Games like the old Crytek Cryengine have proven they can provide 100% of the oblivion immersion and eye candy without crippling your graphics system and bring your computer to a crawl, ridicoulous game and test,....nuff said.
  • dguy6789 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    The article is of a nice quality, very informative. However, what I ponder more than GPU performance in this game is CPU performance. Please do an indepth cpu performance article that includes Celerons, Pentium 4s, Pentium Ds, Semprons, Athlon 64s, and Athlon 64 X2s. Firing squad did an article, however it only contained four AMD cpus that were of relatively the same speed in the first place. I, as well as many others, would greatly appreciate an indepth article speaking of cpu performance, dual core benefits, as well as anything else you can think of.
  • coldpower27 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    I would really enjoy a CPU scaling article with Intel based processors from the Celeron D's, Pentium 4's, and Pentium D's in this game.

  • frostyrox - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    It's something i already knew but I'm glad Anandtech has brought it into full view. Oblivion is arguably one of the best PC games i've seen in 2006, and could very well turn out to be one of the best we'll see all year. Instead of optimizing the game for the PC, Bethesda (and Microsoft indirectly) bring to the PC a half *ss, amature, embarassing, and insanely bug-ridden 360 Port. I think I have the right to say this because I have a relatively fast PC (a64 3700+, x800 xl, 2gb cosair, sata2 hdds, etc) and I'm roughly 65hrs into Oblivion right now. Next time Bethesda should use the Daikatana game engine - that way gamers with decent PCs might not see framerates of 75 go to 25 everytime an extra character came onto the screen and sneezed. Right now you may be thinking that I'm mad about all this. Not quite. But I will say this much: next time I get the idea of upgrading my pc, I'll have to remember that upgrading the videocard may be pointless if the best games we see this year are 360 ports running at 30 frames. So here's to you Bethesda and Microsoft, for ruining a gaming experience that could've been so much more if you gave a d*mn about pc gamers.
  • trexpesto - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link

    Maybe Oblivion should be $100?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now