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
Battlefield 2 Performance
We had hoped to use Battlefield 2142 for testing, but the benchmarking utilities that came with 2142 are actually a step back relative to Battlefield 2. We would also like to get a benchmark using a Titan map, and there are difficulties with doing so (you need to be running the server in order to record a demo in multiplayer). For now, we return to Battlefield 2.
Despite the fact that Battlefield 2 has been available for quite some time, this is our first taste of a game that clearly has issues with 8800 GTX SLI. The single 8800 GTX card is able to place at the top of the performance charts, which is good news. The 8800 GTS comes in faster than the single ATI and GeForce 7900 cards, matching the performance of the 7950 GX2. Unfortunately, 8800 GTX SLI currently performs slower than 7900 GTX SLI and X1950 XTX CrossFire. We would expect updated drivers to fix this issue, though honestly just about every one of the tested graphics cards is capable of running at maximum resolution with 4xAA.
111 Comments
View All Comments
dwalton - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
When using older cards sacrificing IQ for performance is typically acceptable. Who needs AA when running F.E.A.R on a 9700 Pro.However, on a just launched high-end card, why would anyone feel the need to sacrifice IQ for performance? Some may say resolution over AA, but I find it hard to believe that there is a lot of gaming enthusiasts with deep pockets, who play with insane resolutions yet no AA.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
If I look for jaggies, I see them. On most games, however, they don't bother me much at all. Running at native resolution on LCDs or at a really high resolution on CRTs, I'd take that over a lower res with 4xAA. If you have the power to enable 4xAA, great, but I'm certainly not one to suggest it's required. I'd rather be able to enable vsync without a massive performance hit (i.e. stay above 60 FPS) than worry about jaggies. Personal preference.munim - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
"With the latest 1.09 patch, F.E.A.R. has gained multi-core support,"Where is this?
JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
I wrote that, but it may be incorrect. I'm trying to get in contact with Gary to find out if I'm just being delusional about Quad Core support. Maybe it's NDA still? Hmmm.... nothing to see here!JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
Okay, it's the 1.08 patch, and that is what was tested. Since we didn't use a quad core CPU I don't know if it will actually help or not -- something to look at in the future.Nelsieus - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
I haven't even finished reading it yet, but so far, this is the most comprehensive, in-depth review I've seen on G80 and I just wanted to mention that beforehand.:)
GhandiInstinct - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
What upcoming games will be the first to be fully made on DX10 structure? And does the G80 have full support of DX10?timmiser - Thursday, November 9, 2006 - link
Microsoft Flight Simulator X will be DX10 compliant via a planned patch once Vista comes out.JarredWalton - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
All DX10 hardware will be full DX10 (see pages 2-4). As for games that will be DX10 ready, Halo 2 for Vista will be for sure. Beyond that... I don't know for sure. As we've explained a bit, DX10 will require Vista, so anything launching before Vista will likely not be DX10 compliant.shabby - Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - link
They're re-doing a dx8 game in dx10? You gotta be kidding me, whats the point? You cant polish a turd.