Some Doom 3 benchmarks

L5

http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQy

ian25

Hmmm.....no mention of the ati9700pro that i have.But going by what the 9800xt gets i would guess i'll get something like 25-35 fps at high settings, which is what i get in far-cry .I hope the game has graphic options similar to far-cry so the game can be tailored to suit individual pc's.

CivilServant

Hmmm... that is annoying! x800 xt pe is being kicked by the 6800 Ultra and the 6800GT. Nvidia have got their act together with opengl and 6800 series. It's a clear performance advantage. Although ati are meant to be working on a new opengl driver now that there is a game out there "worthy" of opengl development!?

AA Benchmarks are done with 4AA and 8AF enabled, but ati has temporal anti aliasing which can provide twice the quality of aliasing with the same level of performance, or vice versa. This should be benchmarked, to give a more insight into what the ati card do. And show that the ati card has more up it's sleeve.

BKtje

Benchmarks are not a good way of juding cards anymore as the ATI cards usually give a better image. That said it was explained in the article that crippling (ie 12 pipelines not 16) might cost ATI with doom3 fans.

I should run the game with full everything with resonable enough fps at 1024*7.

May upgrade my gfx card (9700pro) but i think it would be overkilll. Ill see when the time comes. (theres more to life than just doom3 )

Matt Simis

ATI cards look superior in certain situations yes (like the Farcry v1.1, both 1.0 and 1.2 look same as NV), but I think its unfair to say they look better in all situations. Lest not forget Nvidia always said their cards were optimised for a certain engine via HWcelerated shadows. Also, as of the 6800 plus cards, nVidia now offer rotated grid AA, which should put them on par with ATI. I certainly dont see any difference in IQ (barring Farcry) between the 9800 and FX5950.

I have seen screenshots that demonstrate nVidias better texture quality, which would seem to balance out vs ATIs better AA. I think this benchmark is a vaild performance metric if the cards produce similar IQ.. I dont remember seeing any pics in the article?



Matt

BKtje

I said usually not all

tuxy

Originally posted by ian25
.I hope the game has graphic options similar to far-cry so the game can be tailored to suit individual pc's.

id software are normaly good in this area so it should

KdjaCL

What a load of poo, why call it Benchmakrs?

Would POPUP AD FOR PCE G CARDS not be a more apt name.

/me kicks my Pc

/me then hugs when h read SDS man be here morrow with 9800XT :d

kdjac

CombatCow

/me waits to get 6800 ultra next week :cool:

CC

KdjaCL

Me starts asking about where you live

kdjac

CapBean

___________________________________________________________________
Quote from Matt Simis
I have seen screenshots that demonstrate nVidias better texture quality, which would seem to balance out vs ATIs better AA. I think this benchmark is a vaild performance metric if the cards produce similar IQ.. I dont remember seeing any pics in the article?
___________________________________________________________________

Static screen shots are not a good way to judge a cards performance in my opinion.
I'v looked at the benchmarks and noticed that most are in the region of 36 to 55 fps.
Most people can only perceive 25 fps so whats the point of 55fps you cant actually see them !!!

The cards (ATI & Nvidia) area very similar but ATI are usually cheaper.
I would not spend €450 to €600 on a video card just because it has a 10fps differance from its competitor.

The cards should be judged on performance AND price.

ATI are usually cheaper than Nvidia but have similar performance.

i_am_dogboy

Not really surprised by the results, nvidia have always outperformed ATI in open gl games, however....I wonder if my geforce 2 will even run the game, any idea of minimum (playable) specs yet?
I hate being a poor student.

Originally posted by CapBean

The cards (ATI & Nvidia) area very similar but ATI are usually cheaper.
I would not spend €450 to €600 on a video card just because it has a 10fps differance from its competitor.

The cards should be judged on performance AND price.

You have to remember that its not just the upper range Nvidia cards that will be on top in the benchmarks, I can imagine that the mid range cards will have a similar performance advantage, and where the price difference isn't worth mentioning, doom fans on a budget will probably pay the extra bit for the improvements.

CapBean

My next vid card will probably ne na ATI 9800XT but I wont to wait until the prices drop some more.
Its still too expensive at €220

CivilServant

I think you'll find most people can tell the difference between a cartoon frame rate and 55fps. In fact people would also tell you 100fps feels a lot smoother than 85fps.

The human eye is very sensitve. If you have a crt monitor, try looking away from the monitor and noticing the screen with your peripheral vision. The lower your refresh rate the more you'll notice the screen updating. Quite noticeable at 60hz, gives me a headache. 85hz suits me grand though.

OfflerCrocGod

Originally posted by CapBean
My next vid card will probably ne na ATI 9800XT but I wont to wait until the prices drop some more.
Its still too expensive at €220

Get a Sapphire 9800 Pro and flash the BIOS to an XT. Jes is selling them at €189 each - the Sapphs from Komplett are also XTs in disguise; my friend just got one today and he got an r360 core (XT labeled as a Pro). Also get some proper cooling for the card an Artic Cooler would be the best.

tuxy

Originally posted by Combatcow
/me waits to get 6800 ultra next week :cool:

CC

isnt that card €550+?
how can you justify that cost?

the gt is about 150 less isnt it? your paying 150 for about 7 fps if those benchmarks are correct, i just cant get my head around paying that kind of money on a card

Töpher

Won't almost/all GT's o/c to ultra speeds on stock cooling? And they all have the 16 pipelines too...

Or so I thought...?

Hal1

Originally posted by Combatcow
/me waits to get 6800 ultra next week :cool:

CC

Hey, where are you buying your card from? I was considering buying one of those or a x800 from Comp universe

CombatCow

E550...no it was E600 from overclockers.co.uk including vat and shipping.They should be getting most of there 6800's in at the weekend apparantly.

how can i justify that cost?....well doom3,farcry and HL2 at 1600x1200 with AA and AF should just about cover it, im getting a waterblock for the card aswell for some overclocking,which should make if future proof.... for a good while anyway

GT = muck, i go for the best tbh,whats the point getting a half arsed card which cant run games up to my spec atm and then replacing it in less then a year.May aswell get a $hit hot one and keep it for 2+ years, more than likely future games will be built on HL2 and doom3 tech.Might have to upgrade when an unreal engine 3 game comes out tho.


CC

Slutmonkey57b

You need to spend more time concentrating on sex and less time concetrating on how well you can play PC games.

The first step to breaking your addiction is to donate your new card to a worthy cause and go outside more.



/slutmonkey changes name to "worthy cause"

CapBean

GOD! My reply caused quite a stir didnt it.

What I meant by the high spec vid cards being too expensive was that by the time games (HalfLife 2, Doom 3 etc ) come along to take advantage of the card, the cards have dropped in price.
D3 & HL3 are still months away from being released.
Anyone who pays €550 - €600 on a vid must have plenty of money to burn!
In 2 months the same cards will have dropped in price as ATI and Nvidia release new versions.
So I'd wait until the games are released then buy a new card if the old one isnt up to the job.

tuxy

so doom 3 isnt out in a few weeks CapBean?

bizmark

Originally posted by CapBean
GOD! My reply caused quite a stir didnt it.

What I meant by the high spec vid cards being too expensive was that by the time games (HalfLife 2, Doom 3 etc ) come along to take advantage of the card, the cards have dropped in price.
D3 & HL3 are still months away from being released.
Anyone who pays €550 - €600 on a vid must have plenty of money to burn!
In 2 months the same cards will have dropped in price as ATI and Nvidia release new versions.
So I'd wait until the games are released then buy a new card if the old one isnt up to the job.

Eh doom 3 is gold and will be out in around 2-3 weeks half life is more than likely 1-2 months away .....Though tbh i do agree with you about 550 euro graphics cards but its their money to spend

KdjaCL

I bought a 9800Xt (well kinda still have to pay for it) but that`ll do me for a year or so.

Nice price too.

kdjac

L5

I was happy with my 9800pro till i heard of all the people with a 68--/x800 etc, now i want one too but im goin to hold out for the next generation of cards before upgrading. Cards date way too fast, 3 months ago the 9800pro was the top card available bar the 9800xt. Now its only midrange :rolleyes:

KdjaCL

ATm 9800s are still top range for games out now ,just a certain 2 games will be better with the PCe cards.


kdjac

BKtje

Now its only midrange

Aiont midrange you'll be glad to hear

Matt Simis

Originally posted by CapBean
___________________________________________________________________
Quote from Matt Simis
I have seen screenshots that demonstrate nVidias better texture quality, which would seem to balance out vs ATIs better AA. I think this benchmark is a vaild performance metric if the cards produce similar IQ.. I dont remember seeing any pics in the article?
___________________________________________________________________

Static screen shots are not a good way to judge a cards performance in my opinion.
I'v looked at the benchmarks and noticed that most are in the region of 36 to 55 fps.
Most people can only perceive 25 fps so whats the point of 55fps you cant actually see them !!!

Thats a myth, I think if you actually test that out you should find it very easy to tell the difference between 25 and 55fps. There was a tool floating around the web that was often used to debunk this, it was three squares moving across the screen, one at 15, one 35 and one at 75Hz (around those figures). It was very clear the one at 75Hz was much smoother, however even it looked a little jagged. In this test the images moved horizontally, which makes the difference easier to see as the human eye can detect movement in the horizontal plane much easier than the vertical.

Tests by the US military showed the upper limit of most humans in the region of 200Hz (fps).


Matt

Giblet

Your eyes aren't sync'd to a game running at 25fps, so they can see the changes flickering, catching in-between frames. The human eye can pick out individual images out of alot of changing images running in excess of 200hz, as was posted above.

Dooom

Originally posted by Matt Simis
Tests by the US military showed the upper limit of most humans in the region of 200Hz (fps).

That was American humans though...

Giblet

Hear what ATI have to say about the latest Doom 3 benchmarks.

One of our staff contacted ATI to inquiry about the highly debated Doom 3 benchmarks that were recently released, here is what was asked:

"I'm just emailing you because I have alot of confused gamers from both Team Radeon and x-3Dfx about what's really happening in Doom3. What they've been presented paints a relatively poor picture on the x800 Pro and x800 XT PE prompting many fellow gamers (about 400 on Team Radeon and 300 or so on x-3Dfx) to question wether or not they should cancel there pre-orders."

ATI response:

"Hi Richard - this is a non issue - Doom 3 isn't even available yet, and we all know that some of our competitors use partial precision where possible. We expect to have updated drivers available in the coming weeks."

UPDATE: "...And btw, let's not lose sight of the fact that ATI performance isn't relatively poor at all. I think Kyle himself said that even the X800pro delivered 'great' performance, and Carmack said in the HardOCP article that there's more to consider than just frame rate. The frame rate difference even today is so minor, it's impossible to tell without diagnostic tools - ie: the end user experience isn't affected. And with ATI you get full-precision enabled all the time - we don't do PP (on R3XX and R4XX) like some of our competitors. It's also important to note that most of today's games play faster on ATI hardware, and you can expect that to extend to other 'big title' games expected this summer. Chris"

Chris Hook


We've found this statement, below, from Dave Orton ATi's CEO to add to the mix which can be found on DriverHeaven:
"We are always looking for ways to improve our products. And a key part of that is our software. Many of the improvements that we have made in the software area are already evident. For example, we have improved our testing processes, resulting in more frequent and more stable drivers and we have implemented a feedback program to learn of driver bugs early on so we can rectify them. Some of the improvements aren’t evident yet, but will be soon. It’s readily apparent that the work we’ve done on the DX driver is world class. We are confident we will do whatever is necessary to make our OGL driver the new industry standard for stability and performance."

Moojuice

well my laptop has a 64m meg Nvida Geforce mobile card and it played Far Cry really well. Some effects had to be turned down a bit but the water effects were still amazing. WIll my machine be able to play Doom 3 at all? Without it looking crap? Its a 2.8 Mhz P4 Desktop proccessor with 512 of ram.

Moo

Ps: Thanks guys!

leeroybrown

A P4 @ 2.8GHz with 512Mb will be fine for Doom 3. Add a reasonable Graphics Card (high end GF4 or above) and it'll play reasonably well. The better the graphics card the more eye candy you can have on.

(There have been so many questions about the min Doom3 spec that it almost warrants a locked sticky saying what will work)

po0k

buy the game.


If it doesn't play fast enough go out and build yourself a new PC.

Or chicken out and get an XBox.

Elessar

Am I reading doom3 information right? Is it an openGL game? Or is it Direct X?

CivilServant

Hehe, OpenGL

rabid

Saw this post on a Doom3 thread over on Blues News, which raised a smile....

********************************************
52. Re: Damn... Jul 14, 14:57 ASLayerAODsk

so...if you get spanked online...its called getting 'pwnd'...and if you have no clue what your doing...your a 'n00b'....so i guess if your comp sux0rs the a55, then youve been 'd00m3d'???
********************************************
******************************

Does your rig suk a55?

Say I should be able to suk in the medium zone...now where did I put that extra gig of ram.....

If you have not done so already download the
Doom3_G4 off Fileshack or wherever you can find it................its only 11mbs (yes I'm blowin g0at5 dialup..)

Its classic - has a mixture of gameplay with interrupts from a slew of the ID dudes ie. Carmack, Duffy etc.

THIS GAME LOOKS FREAKIN AWESOME...... gotta love the last second of the movie when it cuts back to the TechTV hosts!!!!!

Roll on the 13th....................

Azza

Guys there is a very simple solution to this.Instead of worrying which card runs a certain game better. Buy both cards. You can't fail to get good results.

Giblet

New benchmarks posted on Hardocp.

http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQ0

Pretty good.

The avg fps for my system was 47 @ 800x600; medium quality, lowest was 25 or something.