VGA Charts IV: AGP Video Cards

Asus

Newbie
Joined
Aug 22, 2003
Messages
10,346
Reaction score
0
Tom's VGA Charts IV
Sadly they don't use the newest ATI drivers nor 3Dmark2005.
I wish they had a few more benchmarks too, similar to how Xbitlabs does.

ATI's newest drivers fix the AA issue in Joint Operations. Why in the world would Tom benchmark a new review without the latest drivers compared to a previous review where he did use the newer drivers?

Here you can see the newer drivers being used with AA being a non-issue in Joint Operations.
 
well the 4.9's are the latest official driver. but then so is 61.77 for nvidia and hes not using those. dunno. one thing ive liked about ATI in the past is i don't have to go fishing for the right driver out of 50 revisions like you do with nvidia.

so which is the best driver for ATI now?
 
ATI has the first version of their 4.9's (which was used in this "VGA charts IV") but because of a few issues they made public their 4.9 (8.07) beta drivers. Which correct a crashing issue in one game, fix memory effecency with 256MB cards and fix AA in joint operations.

Their 4.10's will match the performance and improvements of the newly released 4.9's (8.07) of course.
 
Is it just me, or did the Radeon 9800 Pro get beaten without fail by nvidia's counterpart?
 
Narcolepsy said:
Is it just me, or did the Radeon 9800 Pro get beaten without fail by nvidia's counterpart?
Looking at only the first few games (or non-game benchmarks) I can see where you would think that, loosing only by a few FPS from the top FX model and all. But you should really look at the rest (or majority) of the graphs.

By the way:
9800XT - 5950 Ultra
9800 Pro 256MB - 5900 Ultra
9800 Pro 128MB - 5900


And if I played Joint Operations, I would be a little disappointed with my 6800GT over my previous 9800 Pro.
 
destrukt said:
200 fsb on a p4 3.2 ? ...

Intel's architecture uses a quad-pumped fsb. So for every one tick of the fsb, it sends 4 things of data.

So with this platform, the 3.2 is really running at a FSB of 200 MHz, but is effectively 800 MHz.
 
What I want to know about ATI is regarding their OpenGL peformance. Does anyone know if it is just their driver's that are holding back the cards in OpenGL performance? Or is it a limitation of the hardware? Or a combination of both? I've been waiting for large optimisations in their drivers with OpenGl applications but to no avail. It must be like the way the card is designed right? i mean you can only improve performance with drivers so much right?
 
Kazuki_Fuse said:
What I want to know about ATI is regarding their OpenGL peformance. Does anyone know if it is just their driver's that are holding back the cards in OpenGL performance? Or is it a limitation of the hardware? Or a combination of both? I've been waiting for large optimisations in their drivers with OpenGl applications but to no avail. It must be like the way the card is designed right? i mean you can only improve performance with drivers so much right?

Asus, posted a righteous link telling the entire story about ATI performance.

http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/2004/07-30_english.php#update
 
Back
Top