|
Test
Setup
Pentium
560 (3.6GHz), Intel D925XCV, 2x512MB Corsair PC5400 ProSeries 4-4-4-12,
120GB SATA Maxtor, Windows XP SP1
Test
Software
Unreal
Tournament 2003
Unreal Tournament 2004
Far Cry
Return To Castle Wolfenstein
Quake 3: Arena
Call of Duty
Doom 3
All
tests were run a total of three times, with the average
results displayed here. A combination of Bench'emAll,
internal scripts, and built-in timedemos were used to gather our
numbers. The driver settings were manually configured for AntiAliasing
and Anisotropic Filtering (on or off), and set to "Quality".
All games were set to their highest allowable game settings, except
for Doom 3, where we chose high, rather than Ultra.
Unreal
Tournament 2003 - Antalus
|
No
AA/AF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
118.54
|
75.12
|
49.84
|
|
PCX5700
|
90.67
|
56.72
|
39.07
|
|
4xAA/4xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
61.66
|
42.03
|
20.78
|
|
PCX5700
|
50.98
|
31.20
|
21.05
|
|
4xAA/8xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
58.38
|
39.69
|
20.18
|
|
PCX5700
|
49.46
|
30.35
|
20.55
|
It's
quite obvious that the PCX5700 can't keep up with the X600XT,
however considering the generational gap of the GPU's this isn't
a surprise. UT2K3 players will be happy with the results above
as 1280x1024 is very playable if you sacrifice enhancements like
FSAA and Anisotropic Filtering. However if you do want the extra
image quality afforded by them you'll probably want to come down
to 1024x768.
Unreal
Tournament 2004 - as-convoy
|
No
AA/AF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
80.34
|
69.88
|
44.92
|
|
PCX5700
|
62.57
|
44.07
|
33.68
|
|
4xAA/4xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
55.47
|
38.89
|
17.22
|
|
PCX5700
|
39.44
|
24.66
|
19.59
|
|
4xAA/8xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
49.52
|
35.58
|
16.17
|
|
PCX5700
|
36.76
|
23.37
|
18.54
|
One
of our newer test games is Unreal Tournament 2004, which I personally
prefer for testing over 2003. Things here are not as clear cut
as with 2003. 1280x1024 is quite playable but the minute you start
to add graphic enhancements you'll want to drop the resolution
down to 1024x768. Not really a big deal as I would guess that
the majority of gamers use a 1024x768 resolution anyway.
One
thing that again shows the generational gap between the two cards
is the 4xAA and 8xAF results. At 1024x768 we get just less than
borderline playable rates, but unfortunately the PCX5700 can't
keep up. However do remember we are using high quality settings,
so a bit of tweaking can get you a boost.
Halo
- w/shader 2.0
|
No
AA/AF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
35.66
|
25.79
|
17.47
|
|
PCX5700
|
27.48
|
18.15
|
13.20
|
Halo
is a game I'm not keen on testing with. The default demo is nothing
but a flyby and not very indicative of actual gameplay and the
game itself has issues with Anti Aliasing (their is none). However
it does serve to stress the graphics cards a little and provide
us with a different aspect of results.
FarCry
- Fort Demo
|
No
AA/AF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
31.28
|
23.12
|
14.90
|
|
PCX5700
|
21.90
|
14.45
|
5.99
|
|
4xAA/4xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
16.86
|
11.03
|
6.44
|
|
PCX5700
|
17.41
|
11.81
|
3.85
|
|
4xAA/8xAF
|
1024x768
|
1280x1024
|
1600x1200
|
|
X600XT
|
16.21
|
10.04
|
6.34
|
|
PCX5700
|
16.46
|
11.26
|
3.79
|
For
FarCry, the results are closer but still in favour of the X600XT.
One thing that is apparent is that without graphic enhancements,
the X600XT holds the frame rates higher with higher resolutions,
however once we turn on FSAA and AF, we get scores that are much
closer and in a few cases even matching. Again, at the risk of
sounding like a broken record, 1024x768 is the resolution of choice.
|
