Battlefield 2 Performance

The most requested game that we didn't include in our initial coverage is Battlefield 2. This highly popular game is quite important in comparing performance, as it does an excellent job of setting the standard for first-person shooter quality. The numbers that we attained came from running our custom BF2 demo on the highest quality settings. This means that anisotropic filtering was enabled both with and without AA (as Doom 3's high quality mode also enables AF).

Our "no AA" performance numbers show the X1800 XT performing on par with the 7800 GTX until we move beyond 1600x1200. The 7800 GT has an advantage over the X1800 XL as well. The most important thing to note is that this is the only test that we have run to show the X1600 XT performing on the level of the GeForce 6800 GT. While it is good to see the new mid-range part performing in its price class, one title is not enough to make it worth the $250. The "budget" X1300 doesn't quite perform as well as the 6600 GT, which looks to sell at about the same price.



After enabling 4xAA on Battlefield 2, the X1800 XT really stretches its legs. Likewise, the X1800 XL jumps ahead of the 7800 GT. When we move to the X1600 XT, the numbers show it falling further behind the 6800 GT.



The X1800 XT bearly breaks a sweat when AA is enabled dropping at most 18.3 percent. In fact, at every resolution, the X1800 XT drops about half the percent decrease in performance as seen on the 7800 GTX explaining the change in leadership between our two tests. Dropping more than the 6800 GT and less than the 6600 GT (percentage-wise), the X1600 XT shows different characteristics than its heavier hitting siblings.



Next up is Day of Defeat: Source. We already had a peak at this game's performance earlier this week. Now, let's see if our extended data supports what we saw then.

Index Day of Defeat: Source Performance
Comments Locked

93 Comments

View All Comments

  • bob661 - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Are they fully DX10 or partially? If partially, will that be enough to be Vista compliant?
  • Clauzii - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    I´m pretty amased that ATI despite the higher clockrate can acomplish almost the same as a 7800GTX although with 2/3 the Pipelinecapacity.

    I´ll look even more forward to R580.
  • MemberSince97 - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Ahh Thank You Derek, this is much more AT style.
  • Madellga - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Derek, nice update. Thanks for including 1920x1200 in the benchmarks, it is a good move and I hope that other sites follow AT on that.

    It is interesting to see how the performance of some higher level cards fall after 1600x1200. Anyone buying WS monitors should pay attention to this.

    I was not conviced that the X1800XT was better performer than the 7800GTX, but looking at the WS high resolutions and AA+AF that pretty much settles the discussion.

    Don't let the critics bug you. Use it as feedback and source of ideas for future reviews.

    On the next article, please do not forget to check the famous "shimmering" effect.
    Does the R520 family handles this issue better than the G70?

    Take care
  • JNo - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link

    Well put! This is extremely helpful for 1920x1200 LCD owners
  • erinlegault - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    I think important point that is missing from all reviews is the importance of a Vista compatible graphics crad. The x1xxx's are the first graphics cards compatible with the new spec.

    So the price premium may be worth while if you are interested in upgrading the Vista, when ever it is finally released.
  • bob661 - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    All you need is DX9 to be Vista compatible.
  • bob661 - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    Oops, DX8.
  • tfranzese - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    From the article:
    quote:

    But performance is absolutely critical on current and near term games.


    Yet you guys tested none. I think benchmarking available versions of FEAR, Call of Duty 2, Serious Sam 2, Black and White 2, etc would be much more enteresting than some of the choices made here. All the cards tested handle todays games well, but I would expect most who buy these cards are buying these for games that are soon-to-be released or coming in the next one or two quarters.
  • karlreading - Friday, October 7, 2005 - link

    i must admit it seems to me everyones just giving anadtech a hard time. the review seemed prtty reasonable, they responded to the massive backlash they got from there first review, and i think thats where the deserve the credit. sheesh guys! givem a break!
    karlos

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now