EVE: The Second Genesis Performance
Eve does want a fast system in general, and this time around, the MR9800 is comparable to the 9700 Pro. We do see a bit more of a drop in performance when enabling 4xAA/8xAF, but 16 fps is actually playable in EVE (though we'd still recommend running without AA/AF enabled for a smooth visual experience here). We don't have anything to compare it to (as we didn't run the other cards at this resolution), but the MR9800 is capable of playing this game at the display's native resolution of 1920x1200, which looks beautiful and runs fine without AA and AF on.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
nserra - Monday, August 23, 2004 - link
Thanks for the reply and it's really impressive that a 256bit memory interface is going into the mobile market so soon.I also don’t understand the problem about the driver? Is it about the time taken to release a new one (validation)? What i do is to force the last catalyst to install, it have worked just fine with me.
ATIMobileGuy - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link
#28 nserraKeep in mind the development cycle for mobile designs is longer than desktop development - when the design was started there were still questions on GDDR3 power and availability at the time, so we felt DDR was the ideal solution for the initial mobile introduction of this type of product. Plus, running at 300MHz and using the full 256-bit memory interface we felt the memory bandwidth was pretty good for a mobile design.
This is not to say GDDR3 is not going to show up in Mobile soon - as I said in post #26, there are a lot of surprises coming your way in the future. ;-)
nserra - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link
To DerekWilson and/or ATIMobileGuy:On you nvidia Geforce5800 review about ati Anisotropic Filtering: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=1779...
“Since there is virtually no difference between ATI's Performance and Quality modes, …..”
Does this still hold true in today’s games?
Since I could get some nice performance boost according to these charts
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=1779...
nserra - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link
To ATIMobileGuy:-If this is for the mobile market, why not use the new GDDR3 memory, since it would lower the power consuming and heat and deliver higher speed.
-Isn’t these chip a "little" waste of time if taken into desktop, since you guys already have a very similar chip but at .15, or we will only will see it on notebooks for the time.
DerekWilson - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
#22 suryadWe actually had the XPS in early July IIRC. We used ATI's latest drivers at that point. I'm not sure what driver the current Dell release is based on, but maybe Darren (ATIMobileGuy) can help us out there ;-)
ATIMobileGuy - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
Comment 5 [I](Posted by Anemone)[/I]Anemone, thanks for the comments. Without saying too much, I can tell you that this was really our first attempt at a new class of product, and once we move into PCI Express we'll have a few more surprises for you that should make you happy!
ATIMobileGuy - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
Re: Comment 20 (the esteemed Mr. Baumann)This is true Dave - unlike the desktop side, every Mobile driver is customized for each notebook for things like power management, hot keys, panel support - all kinds of things. If ATI were to provide "generic" drivers the user would run the risk of losing a lot of features or would experience potential instability.
The OEM has to do a lot of qualification to test all these unique aspects of their driver before feeling comfortable releasing it. Dell has been very good in understanding the need for fresh drivers, expecially for this segment, so I think it won't be too long before you see a new driver release for this system from them.
ATIMobileGuy - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
Hi Everyone - I'm Darren from ATI Mobile group. Just finished reading the review, and wanted to read the comments and see if there was anything I could answer from the comments that were posted; will be checking in sporadically and will give some responses to some of the things that have already been posted if possible.jediknight - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
Doom 3 benchmarks, please!!suryad - Thursday, August 19, 2004 - link
I have a similar specced Dell XPS and I was initially getting a 5440 with 3dmark but then I used Dells release of the 4.8 Catalyst drivers and that alone pushed me to a 6600 on 3dmark and over 43.1k in Aquamark3 all stock settings. Now I am not saying that the benchmark is the tell all in this situation but where these benches performed using the latest driverset? I am curious since I have yet to install any new games on it and wanted to know if I would get a performance boost sorta similar to what I got in 3dmark.