Fall '06 NVIDIA GPU Refresh - Part II: GeForce 7950 GT and SLI
by Derek Wilson on September 14, 2006 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
F.E.A.R. Performance
F.E.A.R. has a built in test that we make use of in this performance analysis. This test flies through some action as people shoot each other and things blow up. F.E.A.R. is very heavy on the graphics, and we enable most of the high end settings for our test.
During our testing of F.E.A.R., we noted that the "soft shadows" don't really look soft. They jumped out at us as multiple transparent shadows layered on top of each other and jittered to appear soft. Unfortunately, this costs a lot in performance and not nearly enough shadows are used to make this look realistic. Thus, we disable soft shadows in our test even though it's one of the large performance drains on the system.
Again we tested with anisotropic filtering at 8x, and all options were on their highest quality (with the exception of soft shadows which was disabled). Frame rates for F.E.A.R. can get pretty low for a first person shooter, but the game does a good job of staying playable down to about 25 fps.
All the cards we tested are playable at 1600x1200 under the settings we tested with F.E.A.R. In this case, the 7950 GT performs significantly better than the $200-$250 cards, but the X1900 XT series both have NVIDIA beat at the higher price point. While not necessary at this resolution, multi-GPU configurations scale very well under F.E.A.R.
When looking at multiple resolutions, nothing really changes. Relative performance is very consistent with 1600x1200. Everything remains playable up to 1920x1440, so with most of the tested GPUs enabling 2x/4xAA is definitely an option even at the highest resolutions. The three slowest cards will really struggle with 4xAA at 1920x1440, but the higher end cards along with the multi-GPU configurations should handle that setting.
F.E.A.R. has a built in test that we make use of in this performance analysis. This test flies through some action as people shoot each other and things blow up. F.E.A.R. is very heavy on the graphics, and we enable most of the high end settings for our test.
During our testing of F.E.A.R., we noted that the "soft shadows" don't really look soft. They jumped out at us as multiple transparent shadows layered on top of each other and jittered to appear soft. Unfortunately, this costs a lot in performance and not nearly enough shadows are used to make this look realistic. Thus, we disable soft shadows in our test even though it's one of the large performance drains on the system.
Again we tested with anisotropic filtering at 8x, and all options were on their highest quality (with the exception of soft shadows which was disabled). Frame rates for F.E.A.R. can get pretty low for a first person shooter, but the game does a good job of staying playable down to about 25 fps.
All the cards we tested are playable at 1600x1200 under the settings we tested with F.E.A.R. In this case, the 7950 GT performs significantly better than the $200-$250 cards, but the X1900 XT series both have NVIDIA beat at the higher price point. While not necessary at this resolution, multi-GPU configurations scale very well under F.E.A.R.
When looking at multiple resolutions, nothing really changes. Relative performance is very consistent with 1600x1200. Everything remains playable up to 1920x1440, so with most of the tested GPUs enabling 2x/4xAA is definitely an option even at the highest resolutions. The three slowest cards will really struggle with 4xAA at 1920x1440, but the higher end cards along with the multi-GPU configurations should handle that setting.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
pmcguire - Thursday, September 21, 2006 - link
Anyone tried the XFX card in a Zalman HD160 case?I have ordered one but now I am getting nervous that the heatsink is too high.
zemane - Saturday, September 16, 2006 - link
marine73 - Friday, September 15, 2006 - link
With some versions of the 7900GT costing $280, you'd have to be nuts not to spend the xtra $20 bucks to get the additional 256Mb of ram. The performance increase is obvious from the charts, and since most Nvidia cores do OC fairly well (my BFG is running 580/800) you could most likely get the 7950GT to peform like a 7900GTX, for about 150-200 bucks less. Now if only they can get them to be DirectX 10 compliant...Pastuch - Thursday, September 14, 2006 - link
In Canada you can buy an ATI/Saphire X1900xt 512mb for $299. A 7950GT goes for $350. These prices are pulled from this weeks flyer at NCIX.com, the Canadian Newegg.As always, Nvidia screws over Canadian customers.
yyrkoon - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
Gee, lets see, I wonder if buying a graphics card that is currently based in my home country is cheaper than one that has to be imported . . .Wait until ATI moves to the US . . .
Pastuch - Thursday, September 14, 2006 - link
THe lowest price I can find in Canada on a 7900GT is $290.ROFL at Nvidia.
P.S. I actually would rather buy Nvidia but the prices up here are so out of whack I can't justify it.
coldpower27 - Friday, September 15, 2006 - link
Yeh, Nvidia currently is expensive in Canada, until prices normalize the X1900 XT 512 is a pretty good deal, as long as it remains in supply.xsilver - Thursday, September 14, 2006 - link
funny,down here in australia - its the other way around
nvidia is cheaper
7900gt = 374au ($280US approx
x1900xt = 410AU (308US approx)
ati is still the better buy because its faster.
it actually gets worse in the lower price bracket of x1900gt as they are quite hard to find and really expensive
xsilver - Thursday, September 14, 2006 - link
oh wait - just looked againthat x1900xt is the 256mb model
if u want the 512mb model
= 525au (395US)
7950gt 512mb = $430au = 325us
big difference!
splines - Friday, September 15, 2006 - link
Same with all electronics, pretty much. Everything from mobile phones up to the AUD$1000 PS3 - and Americans complain about $600?The really odd thing is we have the second highest standard of living in the world, yet our currency is also one of the most undervalued amongst western industrialised nations. Granted, our market is small, but 20-odd million people still have a lot of purchasing power.
*sighs* Maybe one day they'll take us seriously.