Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Why is the Radeon X800 behind Geforce 6800 in Doom3?

Author
Message
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 10:52
Quote: "http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/2004/07-30_english.php"


This is probably one of the most interesting articles i've read in a while, and anyone who thinks they're up with the graphics market should read it through and thouroghly!


Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 13:05
Well it's a good thing the gameplay in Doom 3 doesn't make it worth it to get the 6800, or else nVidia might be sellin more.


http://www.dbspot.com/ - Free website hosting. Fast and reliable... probably.
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 11th Aug 2004 23:39
There are alot of arguments that can be raised with this article in mind and this speed tweak.

The first thing to keep in mind, although the X800 can be tweaks *specifically* for Doom3 using this Hardware Calculation; Carmack himself noted that although there *might* be a performance increase, he didn't believe it would as large as being claimed.

Another thing to note is he also said that the entire shader engine relies on these lookup tables, which means if you replace these there is a change the end result will not appear to run the same.
There is also the fact that using the 6-Series new architecture, it is likely that the 6800 Cards will see the exact same performance boost from doing it hardware.

Something interesting to note about Doom3 though, is that when we have the X800 XT (575/580/16pipe) against the 6800 (320/500/12pipe) we are still seeing the 6800 in the TimeDemo which is a pure graphics benchmark outperforming it by around 5-10%.
To add further insult to injury, in standard gameplay your looking the FPS being affected because the CPU is being used more and what is aparent from this is that the Radeons are still very CPU dependant. What we see is thier FPS dropping even more.

We see this more on the previous generation of cards when running older processors.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=1

A Combination of an Athlon64 3000+ w/Radeon 9800pro will very noticeably out perform your XP2500+ w/Radeon X800pro


Zero Blitzt
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2004
Location: Different Stages
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 00:32
OWNED

[center]
Rush owns--> www.Rush.com ---> I'm going to see them Aug. 7
Come to #coding. We promise we wont kick you!
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 01:31
Doom 3's the exception to the rule of ATI's superiority... not a big deal. nVidia's going to be hit pretty hard when HL2 comes out in a few months.

Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 02:53
haha Mouse.
Yeah, I heard 6800s were exploding because of how hard Doom3 pushed the factory overclocked POSes


http://www.dbspot.com/ - Free website hosting. Fast and reliable... probably.
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 05:55
Quote: "nVidia's going to be hit pretty hard when HL2 comes out in a few months.
"

I doubt it...


Come to the UK Convention on the 23rd & 24th of October
Andy Igoe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 06:19
If you are ever unlucky enough to have nVidia visit your premises be sure to take something to read as they go into great detail about how their graphics cards can run Doom3 in 1600x1200 with all graphics details on 3 frames per second faster than ATI can.

The problem with this demonstration is that the nVidia card is only actually managing 13fps. Hardly impressive. And yeah so it can play Doom faster than ATI but Doom is OpenGL.

I'm no fan of ATI, but if it is directX performance you want, and all other factors are equal, then dont buy the card that is slower under DX.

Mind you other factors are not equal, and despite the suggestion above that nVidia are quaking in their boots, the fact is you can get a decent AGP8 shader 2 nVidia card for £45, and an equivellent ATI card for £95.

I just bought an nVidia. So my DBPro games might be 3 fps slower than if I spent a ton on an ATI, but then again, there's always something better out there and with computers I have come to the conclusion that having the latest in hardware just meens your paying "idiots tax".


Which is the biggest tool? The computer, or the muppet who invented it?
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 07:18
Quote: "I doubt it..."


Naturally

OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 12th Aug 2004 07:50
Quote: "Naturally"

Indeed - never believe propaganda...


Come to the UK Convention on the 23rd & 24th of October

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-22 11:21:54
Your offset time is: 2024-09-22 11:21:54