|
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 , 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.
|
