NVIDIA's GeForce 7800 GTX Hits The Ground Running
by Derek Wilson on June 22, 2005 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Doom 3 1.3 Performance
Unlike most of the other games we're looking at, Doom 3 actually places quite a strain on the memory bandwidth of the graphics card. This seems to be the a common occurrence with many of the OpenGL games, though Doom 3 more so than others. The reason for this is the large number of stencil calculations that are required for the real time shadows. This allows the 6800U SLI setup to actually outperform a single 7800GTX by a sizeable margin - remember that the difference in memory bandwidth between a 6800U and a 7800GTX is only 9%. We also see that antialiasing has a major impact on the single 7800GTX, though it still maintains a commanding lead (25 to 81% depending on resolution and settings) over the 6800U. In the SLI configurations, the 7800GTX only leads by 15% at 1600x1200 4xAA, but that grows to 61% when we move to 2048x1536.
Switching to the ATI card, we can see that ATI has done a lot to close the performance gap in Doom 3. While the 6800U still wins in 1600x1200, the ATI card actually comes out ahead at 2048x1536. Like we've seen in a few other games, though, the NVIDIA drivers don't seem to handle 2048x1536 very well. With AA/AF enabled, the 6800U once again takes a 50% performance hit when increasing the resolution. Due to the dark atmosphere and lighting flashes, Doom 3 is a game that definitely needs to run at a high refresh rate or with VSYNC enabled, so again the lack of performance at 2048x1536 isn't the end of the world. What we're mostly concerned with is taxing the hardware to show future potential, and it's safe to say that the 7800GTX - particularly with SLI - will be able to handle all games for many years.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
127 Comments
View All Comments
Regs - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Yikes @ the graphs lol.I just came close to pushing the button to order one of these but then I said...what games can't play on a 6800GT at 16x12 res? There is none. Far Cry was the only game that comes close to doing it.
Bravo to Nvidia, his and boo @ lagging game developers.
bob661 - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
#19Are you new to this market or do you have a short memory? Don't you remember that the initial 6800 Ultra's cost around $700-800? I sure as hell do. Why is everyone complaining about pricing? These are premium video cards and you will pay a premium price to buy them.
Barneyk - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Yeah, not a single comment on any of the benchmarks, what is up with that?There were alot of wierd scenarios there, why is there NO performance increase in SLI some of the time?
And why is 6800Ultra SLI faster then 7800GTX SLI??
Alot of wierd stuff, and not a singel comment or analysis about it, I always read most new tests here on AT first becasue its usually the best, but this review was a double boogey to say the least...
Dukemaster - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
@21: The score of the X850XT PE in Wolfenstein still looks messed up to me...shabby - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Ya some of the scores dont make much sense, 7800 sli loosing to a single 7800?yacoub - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Hey, looks great! $350 and you've got a buyer here!Lifted - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Guys, they simply reversed the 6800 Ultra SLI and 7800 GTX SLI in all of the 1600 x 1200 - 4x AA graphs.Now everthing is kosher again.
Johnmcl7 - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
To 18 - I have to admit, I didn't bother looking closely at them, seeing the X850XT supposedly beating all the other cards by such a margin at those resolutions showed they were completely screwed up! I didn't notice the performance increase as you go up the resolution, maybe it's something I missed on my own X850XT? ;) I wish...that would be a neat feature, your performance increases as your resolution increases.I agree it needs pulled down and checked, not to be harsh on AT but this isn't the first time the bar graphs have been wrong - I would rather wait for a review that has been properly finished and checked rather than read a rushed one, as it stands it's no use to me because I have no idea if any of the performance figures are genuine.
John
RyDogg1 - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
Wow, who exactly is paying for these video cards to warrant the pricing?Lonyo - Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - link
To #14, the X850XT performance INCREASED by 33% from 1600x1200 to 2048x1536 according to the grahics, so to me that just screams BULLSH!T.I think the review needs taking down, editing, and then being put up again.
Or fixed VERY quickly.
AT IMO has let people down a bit this time round, not the usual standard.