Half Life 2 GPU Roundup Part 2 - Mainstream DX8/DX9 Battle
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 19, 2004 6:35 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Let’s go for a Drive
Our second demo comes from the d2_coast_05 level, which starts off with the Half Life 2 buggy. After hopping in the buggy we take a spirited drive down the high way, (poorly) avoiding enemies as well as abandoned cars. There is some exchange of fire towards the end of the demo, and overall the demo is fairly short.
This demo offers a good idea of general outdoor performance in Half Life 2 where elements such as water are not involved. There are a handful of explosions that take place while the buggy’s machine gun ignites a flammable barrel that also stress the GPU a bit. With the absence of water, the flashlight or any reflective surfaces, we find ourselves with a demo that is far less shader bound than our first benchmark, but just as important since not all areas of Half Life 2 are going to be incredibly shader bound.
The standings don’t really change that much in our at_coast_05 demo, those users who bought Radeon 9600XTs in anticipation of Half Life 2 a year ago made a very wise purchasing decision. Then again, those who bought Radeon 9700 Pros two years ago are still reaping the benefits of their investment today – hang on to that card!
The FX 5900XT continues to do horrendously in DX9 mode.
Running in DX8 mode things change dramatically, the 5900XT is now in the top three, performing almost as well as the 9600XT. The GeForce4 Ti 4600 continues to hide its age very well, even outperforming newer offerings.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
Lord Banshee - Monday, November 22, 2004 - link
Sorry about above post,#50, i hope you are only takinf about nv3x and below core? the nv4x core is almost as good as the newest radeon in rendering dx9 games.
On a side note does anybody care the reason why doom3 models and textures are as good as half-life2? One being the amount of GPU processing power the lighting system takes. And the special effects. I am sure if every body had a 6800 Ultra then ID would have made the textures in doom3 better and used more high polygon models.
But in we all don't so they instead used alot of normal mapping(the future in gameing) and a brand new light system never seen in games before.
But again you most see that the doom3 engine has the ability of using huge textures and models but it is game dependent. Not all games that will use this engine will have the same lighting effect and such, they might want to show off their texture skills, it is the game companies choice.
What doom3 fails at is outdoor enviroments, this is where the Source engine has them good (so they say, i have yet to play half-life 2)
But it looks like the Unreal3 engine will be the best of both worlds, but thats another 2 years most likly.
Lord Banshee - Monday, November 22, 2004 - link
nserra - Monday, November 22, 2004 - link
#40 T8000 ???!?!So why 6600 and 6800 perform very well and 6200 so bad? Aren’t they all the same card? Your post is pointless.
Luckily Valve was hacked?, are you kidding how many people including like my self buy a piece of crap like the 5600, that performs so bad no only on this game but many others. TOO BAD IT WAS HACKED!!!
Sure any card plays it today like one year ago, but not the right way!!!!
I don’t know but I bet when more DX9.0 games came out the difference between the Ati and nvidia will be bigger. Unless there will be an option to enable the fast FP16 mode providing lower image quality like Far Cry.
nserra - Monday, November 22, 2004 - link
We all know that who bought the Ati 9xxx have done a better job than the ones who bought the FX5xxx series card.Now what about an 8500 vs GF3/4.
And some 9000 card too?
DX8.1 is different of DX8.0, I would like to know if the 8500/9000 was a better buy, but today over the geforce3/4.
It’s really important since GFfx sucks today but not 2 years ago, who know what will happen 2 years from now with 9xxx and 6xxx.
Why 6200 performs so badly, and 6600 and 6800 so good?
dderidex - Monday, November 22, 2004 - link
FYI, the compare image on [L=this page]http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2281...[/L] for the water is all wrong. I don't know what they were using for the 'DX8' sample of the water reflection, but that's not what it looks like at all on a GeForce FX card. It looks virtually indistinguishable from the DX9 sample, only with noticeably less smooth transitions with the coastal terrain (not shown in that shot).Unless AT intentionally disabled world reflections when switching to DX8 mode? But, I have a hard time believing they would be so biased.
blckgrffn - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - link
8500/9100 & 9000/9200 & fx5200/5700 Radeon 7000/7500 & GF3/GF2 benches please! There are a lot of these cards out there and I am curious!TheRealSkywolf - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - link
45, ati contributed with a big cut of the budget for half life 2. Thats why it got delayed 1 year.So it is blatant obbious that valve was told to not not make dx 9.0 work well for nvidia fx.
moletus - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - link
#40, you are so wrong wrong and wrong again. What kinda idiot game developer woulnt code as good as possible, regards of who gave em what development money? There are plenty of nvidia cards out there and im quite sure they want to play HL2 too.It's all about making $$$, so...
Cybercat - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - link
#40, not necessarily. The 6200 is typically found to perform close to the X300. Only a few times will it meet up with the X600 Pro's standards.http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2238&...
abakshi - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - link
*other (not over lol)