Now at a more realistic resolution for someone with a Pentium III 700 and a $350 video card, at 1024 x 768 we see the DDR GeForce truly pull ahead of the competition in the 16-bit color tests. Beating out the next fastest Rage Fury MAXX by over 24 fps, the DDR GeForce even delivers a playable 64 fps at 1024 x 768 x 32-bit color. If frame rate is indeed king, then NVIDIA takes the crown here while delivering superb image quality.

Most of the previous generation of cards are having a very hard time competing at this resolution, with the exception of the G400MAX, which is performing at close to a next generation level, the chart is topped with the latest and the greatest from NVIDIA, ATI and S3.

1024 x 768 x 32 at 60 fps? It's possible, and the DDR GeForce brings it to you.

Even the DDR GeForce isn't capable of delivering a playable frame rate at 1600 x 1200 x 32, but in 16-bit color the 35.5 fps it does deliver is quite impressive. It's still clear that 60 fps at 1600 x 1200 is still some time away, but monitors will have to drop in price before you see an influx of gamers demanding 60 fps at such a high resolution. For now, 60 fps at 1024 x 768 or insanely high frame rates at 640 x 480 is all that is needed to fulfill the needs of most of the gamers out there.

Pentium III 700 - Quake III Arena Pentium III 600E - Quake III Arena


View All Comments

  • klah - Monday, September 06, 2004 - link

    1999. Reply
  • SlyNine - Sunday, October 12, 2014 - link

    2004. Reply
  • NotLocke - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link

    2014. Reply
  • _Skylake_ - Saturday, April 16, 2016 - link

    2014 Reply
  • hansmuff - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link

    ^^ You mean 2016 with 2014 performance, Skylake ;) Reply
  • ianmills - Monday, August 20, 2018 - link

    2018 Reply
  • Random Stranger - Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - link

    And owning one (Elsa Erazor X2) with a Slot1 Pentium III 733MHz.
  • pavag - Sunday, July 03, 2016 - link

    So, Anand was ranting about a top GPU from nvidia costing only 300$ Reply
  • artk2219 - Thursday, April 13, 2017 - link

    Hey man, thats like $432.87 as of January 2017 or pretty much the same, $428.93 in your time of July 2016 time traveler. Either way, Vega needs to put the smack down on Nvidias pricing, and you can stick that in your bucket young whipper snappers of the future. :D Reply
  • artk2219 - Sunday, November 18, 2018 - link

    Sadly Vega didn't do anything, here's looking at you Navi. Nvidia needs a smack down on their pricing more than ever. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now