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

The Radeon 9600XT & NV38 Aquamark 3
Comments Locked

263 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    - no contrast between AVAILABLE nvidia detonators and the UNRELEASED drivers used to benchmark.
    - it was unclear which games were using dx8 or dx9 features for these benchmarks without having previous knowledge.
    - more focus placed on performance with older existing games i.e. dx8, Arent top of the line $500 gfx cards intended for use with future games? i.e. dx9
    - image quality issues not adequately discussed (major issues glazed over leaving false impressions of performance in 'some' cards), they may be covered in an upcoming article however alone this particular article may be misleading.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    #38 Well i made it hard for you to understand I guess because you are the only one who complained. Btw. I did not post #36. So there are more of us... :)

    Will sign with the whiner for now.

    The whiner
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    I don't mind either. I still have my 3DFX Voodoo 3 and 32bit at all is only for whiners!
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    OK, you didn't mistype it, you just made it totally unclear and impossible for anyone to really understand. No big deal.

    However, to imply that Anandtech should have spent time doing IQ testing instead of NV38 testing is nothing sort of ridiculous. No one (except you apparently) wants to see IQ testing instead of NV38 testing.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    I d like to see q3 in your benchmarking suite again.
    it s still the only q3engine game where a brand new graphics card can run smoothly with Fsaa and AF on highest quality settings
    important is also that the timedemo is full of action an filled with a lot of players
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    I have always been an Nvidia fanboy, and I don’t mind running my card in 16bit texture quality.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    So I'm the only one who picked up on the "we'll do IQ in part 2" thing?
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    Not that reviews was the subject. LOL Well, perhaps I don't know grammar better than you but I did not mistype anything.

    Fact is that "they" can only refer to "the other sites" and not Anandtech.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    Okay, on other sites is not a subject but "they" can not refer to "reviews" (the context forbids that). So hopefully you understand now that "they" can only refer to "the other sites" since I did not mention Anandtech there. :)
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link

    #32 Okay a second time and I will take you by the hand (please respond with a joke about me being gay):

    This is what I wrote (the whole paragraph):

    "Perhaps YOU are clueless. I don't need to wait for complete reviews on other sites. And yes, they might have had more time as they did not benchmark NV38. However that they did not get NV38 makes this review even more suspicious."

    I wrote about reviews on other sites there. You see? From that moment on every "they" automatically refers to "the other sites" until I come up with a new subject? Okay? That is grammar and hard to understand but you will get there.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now