 |
Untitled Document
ATi
| |
3200+ |
Dual
Xeon |
%
Increase |
| 3DMark 2003 |
11,687 |
11,972 |
+2.4% |
| Aquamark |
56,244 |
56,368 |
+0.2% |
| % Increase |
|
|
+1.3% |
| Far Cry (Low) Average FPS |
61.37 |
60.78 |
-1% |
| Far Cry (Medium) Average FPS |
59.03 |
57.36 |
-3% |
| Far Cry (High) Average FPS |
42.92 |
40.63 |
-5% |
| % Increase |
|
|
-3% |
| Halo (Low) Average FPS |
102.03 |
89.75 |
-12% |
| Halo (Medium) Average FPS |
84.61 |
81.98 |
-3% |
| Halo (High) Average FPS |
65.43 |
65.31 |
0% |
| % Increase |
|
|
-5% |
| Call of Duty (Low) Average FPS |
125.3 |
130.6 |
+4% |
| Call of Duty (Medium) Average
FPS |
123.8 |
128.6 |
+4% |
| Call of Duty (High) Average FPS |
121.4 |
126.2 |
+4% |
| % Increase |
|
|
+4% |
| Average % Increase |
|
|
-0.8% |
nVidia
| |
3200+ |
Dual
Xeon |
Dual
Xeon, 61.45 |
% Increase (61.45) |
| 3DMark 2003 |
11,709 |
11,998 |
12,058 |
+3% |
| Aquamark |
64,960 |
45,376 |
64,960 |
0% |
| % Increase |
|
|
|
+1.5% |
| Far Cry (Low) Average FPS |
63.95 |
63.16 |
63.04 |
-1% |
| Far Cry (Medium) Average FPS |
55.81 |
55.82 |
58.80 |
+5% |
| Far Cry (High) Average FPS |
42.65 |
43.77 |
47.42 |
+11% |
| % Increase |
|
|
|
+5% |
| Halo (Low) Average FPS |
72.75 |
90.69 |
93.25 |
+28% |
| Halo (Medium) Average FPS |
73.34 |
81.68 |
82.76 |
+13% |
| Halo (High) Average FPS |
58.62 |
64.62 |
64.73 |
+10% |
| % Increase |
|
|
|
+17% |
| Call of Duty (Low) Average FPS |
105.2 |
105.0 |
105.1 |
0% |
| Call of Duty (Medium) Average
FPS |
99.3 |
99.5 |
99.6 |
0% |
| Call of Duty (High) Average FPS |
91.2 |
90.7 |
90.6 |
0% |
| % Increase |
|
|
|
0% |
| Average % Increase |
|
|
|
+6% |
The results from both cards are quite frankly surprising. We were really expecting
to see more difference than this. There is a notable increase in performance
with Halo on the nVidia card but apart from that, very little difference. You
will notice the Aquamark score for the 6800GT is quite low with the 61.12 drivers.
The drivers actually picked the card up as a 6800 Ultra, which made us wonder
if there was a compatibility issue. But considering how architecturally close
these cards are, this shouldn't have made a huge difference. The 61.45 drivers
soon fixed this issue and the result was as we would expect.
There are a couple of reasons we can think of why we have results like this.
The DDR-II memory runs at CAS4, whilst we have much faster memory in the AMD
system. The 3200+ used in our test bed is the 1MB cache version rather than
the 512KB version, giving the Intel chip less edge in that respect. The PCI Express
drivers are also a little immature at this point in time.
Either way, we would have expected even a standard 3.2GHz Prescott system to
be a little faster than a 3200+. It's occasions like this where it would be
nice to redo benchmarks on both platforms to come to some better conclusions
and certainly have some more interesting results. But as it happens, there are
still very few samples of these cards around and we have a limited time with them
before they have to be moved on.
It is hard to draw any conclusions about the impact of the PCI Express platform
as there are far too many changes in the two systems. But, what is most interesting
is how the nVidia card had at least some advantage, while the ATi card in general
was running slower. Considering nVidia are using an HSI bridge chip and ATi's
solution is "native", this at least makes the results slightly intriguing
and worthy of future testing.
Summary
At the moment, the current PCI Express graphics cards offer very little advantage
over their AGP counterparts and the cards are available in both AGP and PCI-E
form. So early adoption of this technology won't give much benefit.
Just like the move from ISA to PCI, the first motherboards will more than likely
include PCI And PCI-Express slots, so you won't have to upgrade all your expansion
cards just yet. Some motherboards will also include AGP slots, but this is still
worth bearing in mind.
Upgrading to PCI-E is quite a considerable upgrade. To start with, you will
need a new PCI Express capable motherboard and a PCI Express graphics card to
go with it. Considering there will be no PCI Express solution for Athlon XP
users, a new CPU might also be needed. This in turn, might require new memory,
more than certainly if you want to move up to the DDR-2 standard.
We are already seeing Intel chipset boards on the market now and the graphics
cards will be along in the near future. So, if you are in severe need of an
upgrade, why invest in old technology? This should future protect you some what.
<< Back | 1 | | 2 | | 3 | Next >>
|
|
