Fall 2003 Video Card Roundup Part I - ATI's Radeon 9800 XT
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on October 1, 2003 3:02 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
AquaMark 3
Despite what some people would like everyone to think, Aquamark3 is really a test of how people developing software now envision DirectX 9 pixel and vertex shaders will be used in the future. The situation is very reminiscent of the first Sony PlayStation: the first games that used the technology were limited by the hardware until developers really learned to work with the hardware rather than on the hardware. As time progressed, we went from what were essentially ports of 16bit console games to amazingly complex and beautiful games like Gran Turismo 2. The same thing will happen with shader technology, and no amount of guessing and throwing functions at a gpu will tell you how its performance will really be in the future. Essentially, my advice is that any piece of software that claims it is a valid predictor of future performance should be taken lightly. We based our decision to include Aquamark3 on its popularity in the community. Aquamark3 is a cool piece of software, with some pretty neat tests, and a high score in any benchmark can still earn bragging rights in the forums. The only Aquamark3 test we ran was the publicly available 1024x768 4xAF noAA in order to maximize the usefulness of these numbers to the community. Our drivers were set to allow application control of AF and AA.
We can see almost a pairing off of the cards in direct competition with one another from each camp. ATI pulls ahead by an insignificant margin in the case of the top cards, but the 5600 Ultra falls way behind in this test. Image quality appears to have improved for NVIDIA in this benchmark over what has been reported of previous drivers, and the NV38 handled the massive overdraw portion of the test the smoothest of all the cards. We will be taking a much closer look at image quality very soon, but until then, it looks like ATI and NVIDIA have equal footing in the Aquamark3 arena and we are left to find more useful information about their differences elsewhere. We would also like to point out that the 9700 Pro held its own in this test inching out the standard 9800.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
263 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
#92, for the 100,000,000 time in these comments, doom3 is not dx9.How can anyone take your post seriously when you state 'facts' that you just got from the top of your head. Read your post, read the facts and think about how stupid you look.
btw, great review Anand and to other whiners who keep harping on about IQ and Resolutions being low, it's part one as mentioned at start of review. Read the whole review and you won't look so silly LMAO
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I want 1600 x 1400 with max aa/af!!!!!!!!!!!!Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Great group of games, though I'm surprised you have time to run so many tests. Hopefully you won't get overwhelmed and have to cut it back down.Nitpicky bit, but some corrections to the titles of your games:
- Neverwinter Nights: Shadows of Undrentide
- Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy
Did you get an early copy of Halo? Man you guys get all the good stuff :)
Link - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
BAD,BAD,BAD review.Why did you choose to use only 2.8Ghz? It's THE limiting factor that is preventing XT from showing its full capability.
I'd bluntly say this review(er) is favoring FX by not using higer clocked cpu and beta driver for FX.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
How long have those underlined, highlighted words that look like links been ads here? That is one lame form of advertising... very annoying...Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
That invisible Prescott thing is crazy! Why the hell would they do that?Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Are these even DX9 games? If not, who cares.Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
PLEASE add Morrowind to test suite!!!Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Sorry I don't have time to read through all the posts, so please forgive me if it's been mentioned above.It should be noted that due to a bug with ATI and Halo, ATI cards using Catalyst 3.7 drivers DO NOT USE Shader 2.0, currently only nVidia cards (that are capable) use 2.0
In the .txt output file, it clearly shows ATI using 1.4 shader, while nVidia (5900) uses 2.0 This is supposed to be fixed in next driver release and/or patch from Halo.
Supposedly you can force the ATI cards to run in 2.0 but adding a -use20 in the shortcut properties.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Yes. So he's benchmarking unreleased hardware (NV38) with unreleased drivers (52.xx) on an unreleased cpu (Prescott).