![]() ![]() This however not even absolutely contradicts itself with our realizations. In contrast to the statements of our youngest driver comparison, AnandTech didn’t notice any general differences of the image quality between the Detonator 52.14 and 45.23 and therefore AnandTech praises the new driver a little into the sky. AnandTech uses the Catalyst 3.7 on ATi side and the Detonator 52.14 on the nVidia side to compare the image quality. Beside the game benchmarks with 18 games, the image quality tests made with each of those games are strongly worth to be mentioned. "AnandTech made an extremely extensive article about the performance and image quality of the current high-end graphic cards like Radeon 9800XT and GeForceFX 5950 Ultra (NV38). Anonymous User - Saturday, Octolink Here's is part of an addendum to the 3DCenter article direclty addressing this comparison:.If you'd like to learn more, I would point you to them.įor our tests, the only really important information is that we use the NVIDIA Cg compiler rather than the DX9 HLSL default compiler (there was no performance difference between the two on NVIDIA cards for the most part, only image quality improvements). Beyond3d has some extensive documentation of the TRAOD settings and all the options. But since we are comparing performance of each card to itself in order to see a performance delta, the actual settings shouldn't be a problem. The reason we check AA and not AF is that AF happens during texturing, but AA is implemented via shaders in TRAOD so it stresses the card in more of the way we want to test. ![]() Anisotropic filtering is selectable in the game, and was left off for all tests. Part of the reasoning behind this was that AA in Tomb Raider only works if set by the application. For each card, we use the application to set all the features and left the drivers alone. We did four tests at each resolution in order to see the performance differences with and without PS 2.0 and with and without AA. We have turned this game into a sort of stress test that pushes the cards as far as they can go in order to only test the real world impact of DX9 Pixel Shaders. In taking this stance, we have decided to do things a little differently than most other sites when it comes to TRAOD. I also feel comfortable saying that TRAOD performance is a predictor of nothing but TRAOD performance. Trying to buy something now in order to be ready for games of the future only means that you won't have that money to spend on the newest best card that's out at that point. Looking back though, I can offer this advice: don't spend $500 on a video card until the game you want to play on it comes out. No one seems to want to lend me a time machine, so I can't get those numbers yet. Unfortunately, future performance can't be predicted until we have games from the future. It is our opinion that this game won't be heavily played and is more of just a synthetic benchmark people want to see in order to try to predict future performance. The graphics features are no where near as impressive as something along the lines of Half Life 2 and high dynamic range effects, and it looks more like a DX7 game running on DX9 shaders. Our initial thinking was that TRAOD simply isn't a very good game, nor would it be representative of future DX9 games. But it's also our duty to try to make sure the information you get here is complete (which is a daunting task for this particular game). The inclusion of TRAOD in this benchmark suite is based on the demand of the community (as everything here always will be). I had my reasons for not wanting to benchmark this game, and in order for me to feel comfortable with handing out the numbers I need to touch on some of the more important issues. So, as I'm writing this, the phrase "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |