NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 (G80): GPUs Re-architected for DirectX 10
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on November 8, 2006 6:01 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Our DX9FSAAViewer won't show us the exact sample patterns for CSAA, but we can take a look at where ATI and NVIDIA are getting their color sample points:
| ATI |  |
 |
 |
| G70 |  |
 |
 |
| G80 |  |
 |
 |
| G80* |  |
 |
 |
*Gamma AA disabled
As we can see, NVIDIA's 8x color sample AA modes use a much better pseudo random sample pattern rather than a combination of two rotated grid 4xAA patterns as in G70's 8xSAA.
While it is interesting to talk about the internal differences between MSAA and CSAA, the real test is pitting NVIDIA's new highest quality mode against ATI's highest quality.
G70 4X G80 16XQ ATI 6X
Hold mouse over links to see Image Quality
G70 4X G80 16XQ ATI 6X
Hold mouse over links to see Image Quality
Stacking up the best shows the power of NVIDIA's CSAA with 16 sample points and 8 color/z values looking much smoother than ATI's 6xAA. Compared to G70, both ATI and G80 look much better. Now let's take a look at the performance impact of CSAA. This graph may require a little explanation to understand, but it is quite interesting and worth looking at.
As we move from lower to higher quality AA modes, performance generally goes down. The exception is with G80's 16x mode. Its performance is only slightly lower than 8x. This is due to the fact that both modes use 4 color samples alongside more coverage samples. We can see the performance impact of having more coverage samples than color samples by looking at the performance drop from 4x to 8x on G80. There is another slight drop in performance when increasing the number of coverage samples from 8x to 16x, but it is almost nil. With the higher number of multisamples in 8xQ, algorithms that require z/stencil data per sub-pixel may look better, but 16x definitely does great job with the common edge case with much less performance impact. Enabling 16xQ shows us the performance impact of enabling more coverage samples with 8x multisamples.
It is conceivable that a CSAA mode using 32 sample points and 8 color points could be enabled to further improve coverage data at nearly the same performance impact of 16xQ (similar to the performance difference we see with 8x and 16x). Whatever the reason this wasn't done in G80, the potential is there for future revisions of the hardware to offer a 32x mode with the performance impact of 8x. Whether the quality improvement is there or not is another issue entirely.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
111 Comments
View All Comments
yyrkoon - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
If you're using Firefox, get, and install the extension "flashblock". Just did this myself today, tired of all the *animated* adds bothering me while reading articles.Sorry AT guys, but we've had this discussion before, and its realy annoying.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Do you want to be able for us to continue as a site? Because ads support us. Anyway, his problem is related to not seeing images, so your comment about blocking ads via flashblock is completely off topic.yyrkoon - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Of course I want you guys to continue on as a site, just wish it were possible without annoying flashing adds in a section where I'm trying to concentrate on the article.As for the off topic part, yeah, my bad, I mis-read the full post (bad habit). Feel free to edit or remove that post of mine :)
archcommus - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
What browser are you using?falc0ne - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
firefox 2.0JarredWalton - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
If Firefox, I know there's an option to block images not on the originating website. In this case, images come from image.anandtech.com while the article is on www.anandtech.com, so that my be the cause of your problems. IE7 and other browsers might have something similar, though I haven't ever looked. Other than that, perhaps some firewall or ad blocking software is to blame - it might be getting false positives?archcommus - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Wow to Anandtech - another amazing, incredibly in-depth article. It is so obvious this site is run by dedicated professionals who have degrees in these fields versus most other review sites where the authors just take pictures of the product and run some benches. Articles like this keep the AT reader base very very strong.Also wow to the G80, obviously an amazing card. My question, is 450W the PSU requirement for the GTX only or for both the GTX and GTS? I ask because I currently have a 400W PSU and am wondering if it will be sufficient for next-gen DX10 class hardware, and I know I would not be buying the highest model card. I also only have one HDD and one optical drive in my system.
Yet another wow goes out to the R&D monetary investment - $475 million! It's amazing that that amount is even acceptable to nVidia, I can't believe the sales of such a high end, enthusiast-targeted card are great enough to warrant that.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Sales of the lower end parts which will be based off G80 are what make it worthwhile, I would guess. As for PSU, I think that 450W is for the GTX, and more is probably a safe bet (550W would be in line with a high-end system these days, although 400W ought to suffice if it's a good quality 400W). You can see that the GTX tops out at just under 300W average system power draw with an X6800, so if you use an E6600 and don't overclock, a decent 400W ought to work. The GTX tops out around 260W average with the X6800, so theoretically even a decent 350W will work fine. Just remember to upgrade the PSU if you ever add other components.photoguy99 - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
I just wanted to second that thought -AT articles have incredible quality and depth at this point - you guys are doing great work.
It's actually getting embarrasing for some of your competing sites, I browsed the Tom's article and it had so much fluff and retread I had to stop.
Please don't forget the effort is noticed and appreciated.
shabby - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
It wasnt mentioned in the review, but whats the purpose of the 2nd sli connector?