Hardware Features and Test Setup

We're talking about features and tests today because we are going to be trying something a bit different this time around. In addition to our standard noAA/4xAA tests (both of which always have 8xAF enabled), we are including a performance test at maximal image quality on each architecture. This won't give us directly comparable numbers in terms of performance, but it will give us an idea of playability at maximum quality.

These days, we are running out of ways to push our performance tests. Plenty of games out there are CPU limited, and for what purpose is a card as powerful as an X1900XTX or 7800 GTX 512 purchased except to be pushed to its limit and beyond? Certainly, a very interesting route to go would be for us to purchase a few apple cinema displays and possibly an old IBM T221 and go insane with resolution. And maybe we will at some point. But for now, most people don't have 30" displays (though the increasing power of today's graphics cards is certainly a compelling argument for such an investment). For now, people can push their high end cards by enabling insane features and getting the absolute maximum eye candy possible out of all their games. Flight and space sim nuts now have angle independent anisotropic filtering on ATI hardware, adaptive antialiasing for textured surfaces helps in games with lots of fences and wires and tiny detail work, and 6xAA combined with 16xAF means you'll almost never have to look at a blurry texture with jagged edges again. It all comes at a price, or course, but is it worth it?

In our max quality tests, we will compare ATI parts with 16xAF, 6xAA, adaptive AA, high quality AF and as little catalyst AI as possible enabled to NVIDIA parts with 16xAF, 4x or 8xS AA (depending on reasonable support in the application), transparency AA, and no optimizations (high quality) enabled. In all cases, ATI will have the image quality advantage with angle independent AF and 6x MSAA. Some games with in game AA settings didn't have an option for 8xAA and didn't play well when we forced it in the driver, so we opted to go with the highest in game AA setting most of the time (which is reflected by the highest MSAA level supported in hardware - again most of the time). We tend to like NVIDIA's transparency SSAA a little better than ATI's adaptive AA, but that may just come down to opinion and it still doesn't make up for the quality advantages the X1900 holds over the 7800 GTX lineup.

Our standard tests should look pretty familiar, and here is all the test hardware we used. Multiple systems were required in order to test both CrossFire and SLI, but all single card tests were performed in the ATI reference RD480 board.

ATI Radeon Express 200 based system
NVIDIA nForce 4 based system
AMD Athlon 64 FX-57
2x 1GB DDR400 2:3:2:8
120 GB Seagate 7200.7 HD
600 W OCZ PowerStream PSU

First up is our apples to apples testing with NVIDIA and ATI setup to produce comparable image quality with 8xAF and either no AA or 4xAA. The resolutions we will look at are 1280x960 (or 1024) through 2048x1536.

Not Quite Ready: The Ultimate Gamer Platform, RD580 The Performance Breakdown
Comments Locked

120 Comments

View All Comments

  • Orbs - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link

    I didn't see any comparisons between X1900 XT CrossFire and X1900 XTX CrossFire, except for the comments at the end of the article saying diminishing returns resulting in even smaller a gap in CrossFire than the XTX had over the XT to begin with.

    With the exception of 1 B&W2 test (which I suspect is a typo), the graphs all show the X1800 XT vs. the X1900 XTX. Those are two different generations, not just clock speeds.
  • poohbear - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    I LOVE competition.:)
  • poohbear - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    especially GOOD competition.:0
  • Aquila76 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Nice. Maybe we'll start seeing some real developments in GPU's again. Right now, it's more of a 'do what we've been doing but faster', maybe we'll start seeing some new innovations in video tech in the coming year (adding physics processing, wider encoding capabilities, etc.).
  • Spoelie - Thursday, January 26, 2006 - link

    The x.00 line was more of the same yeah, but the x1.00 line is architecturally a pretty large step forward, finally on par with nvidia where it really needed to and a few steps ahead in other areas. If only they gave it more ROPs/Texture engines.
  • Phantronius - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    And the shitty cycle of upgrading continues.
  • Capt Caveman - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    And available at a good price. Way to go ATI.
  • gimpsoft - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    nice scores on ATI but i still have my 6800GT ill wait until next 2 gen i see we can now play respectable 40 frames + @ 19200X1400 nice to know when 1080p tv are out

    don't know either that or get a PS3 will see =) it's getting way to expensive.
  • bamacre - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    WTF is your idea of "good price?" I see X1900 XT starting at $550 to $605 per card.
  • Capt Caveman - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

    Digitally Unique has the X1900XT for $525 and Actbuy had them for $504. Based on performance, these cards offer a great bang for your buck. And this is coming from a GTX 512 owner.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now