Menu
Asus V8440 TD and V8460 ultra TD in the test: Two 'Ti' tans among themselves

Asus V8440 TD and V8460 ultra TD in the test: Two 'Ti' tans among themselves

GL Excess

GL Excess is an OpenGL benchmark that actually makes very little demands on the graphics hardware. Scenes with over 400 or even 800 frames per second are not uncommon here. But it offers some remarkable effects. Due to its low demands on the graphics card, it canonly illustrate the differences between the cards within the system limit, since other components can act as brakes here.

GL Excess v1.1a 32Bit
Unit: Points
  • 1024x768:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      7.062
    • Asus V8440
      6,758
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      6.375
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      6.126
    • GeForce3
      5.432
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      5.008
    • GeForce4 MX440
      4,435
  • 1152x864:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      6,472
    • Asus V8440
      6,100
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      5.867
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      5,473
    • GeForce3
      4.929
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      4.548
    • GeForce4 MX440
      4.037
  • 1280x1024:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      5,820
    • Asus V8440
      5.518
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      5,092
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      4.729
    • GeForce3
      4,379
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      4,056
    • GeForce4 MX440
      3,600
  • 1600x1200:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      4,857
    • Asus V8440
      4,509
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      4.245
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      3.891
    • GeForce3
      3.781
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      3,539
    • GeForce4 MX440
      3.155

A very linear increase in performance, from the DirectX-7 card GeForce4 MX440 to the top model from Asus, the V8460 ultra. Under such circumstances, the around € 500 that you would have to put on the table for such a noble item could hardly be justified. While the rest of the system can keep up in the lower regions, at the top the gaps in relation to the clock rate of the graphics card are getting tighter.

In this test, the memory bandwidth is more important than the actual chip speed.

Vulpine GL Mark

The GLMark was developed by the German software company Vulpine and like 3DMark2000 and 3DMark2001 for DirectX it is a purely synthetic benchmark for OpenGL. The benchmark is highly complex, especially in terms of the number of polygons, and can optionally use some of the new GeForce3 or GeForce4 Ti features. This makes the comparison of all cards really fair and since in this case only nVidia cards take part in the test, the special OpenGL functions of the newer chips were also used.

Vulpine GL v1 .1p 32Bit
  • 1024x768:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      104.2
    • AsusV8440
      99.3
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      92,8
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      91,5
    • GeForce3
      71,5
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      64.0
  • 1152x864:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      96.2
    • Asus V8440
      90.2
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      82.1
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      80,4
    • GeForce3
      62,1
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      55,1
  • 1280x1024:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      86,6
    • Asus V8440
      79,1
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      70,6
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      68.7
    • GeForce3
      53.0
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      46,6
  • 1600x1200:
    • Asus V8460 ultra
      68.1
    • Asus V8440
      61.0
    • GF4 Ti4200 (225/250MHz)
      53,5
    • GF4 Ti4200 (250/222MHz)
      51,6
    • GeForce3
      40,1
    • GeForce3 Ti200
      35,0

The new pixel shader functions (even if they are in OpenGL via extensionsrealized) prevented us from being able to compare the GeForce4 MX440 here.

The two Asus cards can clearly stand out from the rest of the field and form a lonely top duo in this test, which mainly demands the T&L unit .

On the next page: Game benchmarks

Comments