Fall 2003 Video Card Roundup Part I - ATI's Radeon 9800 XT
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on October 1, 2003 3:02 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The New Test Suite
As we mentioned at the beginning of this article, we are introducing a brand new test suite with this review and we are also kicking off the first installment of a multipart series covering multiple aspects of current (and somewhat next) generation gaming performance.
By no means should you take the limited (yet extensive) tests we have here as all you will see from us, but rather something to whet your appetite for what is yet to come. The focus of this review is plain and simple – comparing the basic performance of the latest offerings from ATI and NVIDIA. In the future installments we will cover image quality, CPU scaling and other aspects of performance in greater detail. We will be making notes of noticeable visual differences between ATI and NVIDIA in this article, but a comparison with supporting images will be done in Part II of the series.
As far as the new test suite is concerned, here are the benchmarks that made it in:
AquaMark 3
Command & Conquer Generals: Zero Hour
F1 Challenge ’99-‘02
Final Fantasy XI Benchmark 2
Halo
Homeworld 2
Jedi Knight III: Jedi Academy
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004
Neverwinter Nights: The Shadows of the Undrentide
Simcity 4
Splinter Cell
Unreal Tournament 2003
X2
Warcraft III: Frozen Throne
Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
We are working on expanding the suite even further, but for now this is what we have. If you’d like to see more games added please feel free to let us know either by sending an email or even better, leaving a comment through the system at the bottom of the page.
We used ATI’s publicly available Catalyst 3.7 drivers and in order to support the NV38 we used NVIDIA’s forthcoming 52.14 drivers. The 52.14 drivers apparently have issues in two games, neither of which are featured in our test suite (Half Life 2 & Gunmetal).
Our test bed was configured as follows:
2.8GHz Intel Processor Prescott
512MB DDR400
Intel 875P Motherboard
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
263 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I think I remember that Tron 2.0 asked me to install DX9 so it probably uses some DX9 functions and it's an existing game so why not try to build a benchmark on it? Anyway since we're dealing with unreleased Det50 drivers here... (I rather prefer the THG way of dealing with that)BTW, I think there's a massive misunderstanding on whether a game is DX8/8.1/9; it can be all at the same time. You can use DX8 pixel shaders and DX9 pixel shaders at the same time.
It's just that as soon as you start using DX9 functions you lose compatibility with DX8/8.1 compatible cards. It's up to the developer to replace these convenient DX9 specifics by DX8/8.1 compatible pixel shaders for instance. So DX9 is really an extension to DX8.1 and DX8.1 is an extension to DX8 and so on
Oh and Doom III is OpenGL for God's sake!!!!!!!!!
appu - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
It would be a good idea to include at least FIFA2003 (and if possible, NFS HP2 or PU) mainly for
the same reason why C&C was benched. These are
really popular games and people would like to know
how they "feel" running with these new cards and
drivers. Also, FIFA 2004 is reportedly coming up
with even more impressive graphic quality and AI
(the latter could be a reason to CPU bench it,
perhaps?).
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
#59 - halflife2 will be a very important benchmark, but its not out yet.. although a benchmarking tool was promised around this timeAnonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Well done guys, defintely going down the right track, testing cards with REAL games that people actually play.Still needs a little refining - HL2 can't be ignored as a valid benchmark!
Keep up the good work.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
im in the same boat as you here #57, very excited about the 9600XT although i think that its more a case of not available than lack of want for a review on AT's part.Can't wait to see how they go =)
zxyth - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I'm was hoping to see benchmarks for the 9600XT. $500 for a new card is rather high for someone on a budget. I've been interested in the 9600 Pro cards for a while and I'm disappointed none of the 9600's were shown. Not everyone can afford the high end cards and I for one would like to see more coverage of the cards that many more people are like to have or buy. It's great to see the flagship cards and what they can do, but don't forget some of us just can't go that route. And we'd like to see benchmarks for the cards that we have or want to purchase.Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
#52 I guess we are both whiners then. I keep whining about Anandtechs review and you about my comments. Peace, I'm getting tired.Evan Lieb - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
A 2.8GHz Prescott CPU was used. Anand probably didn't say anything just to tease you. ;)Take care,
Evan
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Prescott will come out at 3.2 and 3.4 GHz later this year.Lower versions 3.0/2.8...will follow afterwards.
So its for sure no Prescott here.
And if, I wonder why there is no test/word at all about it.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Correction, I meant #41.