Menu
Connect3D Radeon 9700 Pro in the test: performance leap at high resolutions

Connect3D Radeon 9700 Pro in the test: performance leap at high resolutions

Table of contents
  1. 1 Introduction
  2. 2 The card
  3. Scope of delivery
  4. 3 Drivers
  5. 4 Specs and technology
    1. 5 FSAA and AF
  6. 6 Benchmarks
  7. Test system
  8. 7 Synthetic tests
    1. 3DMark2001 SE
    2. 8 3DMark Detail
    3. 9 Villagemark D3D
    4. 10 Villagemark Detail
    5. 11 TempleMark D3D
    6. TempleMark D3D detail
    7. 12 Codecreatures Bench
    8. 13 Codecreatures Detail
    9. 14 Aquamark D3D
    10. 15 Aquamark D3D detail
  9. 16 Game benchmarks
    1. Ultima IX D3D
    2. 17 Ultim a IX D3D Detail
    3. 18 Comanche4 D3D
    4. 19 Comanche4 D3D Detail
    5. 20 Dungeon Siege
    6. 21 Dungeon Siege Detail
    7. 22 Aquanox
    8. 23 Aquanox in detail
    9. 24 Jedi Knight II
    10. 25 Jedi Knight II Detail
    11. 26 Max Payne
    12. 27 Max Payne detail
    13. 28 Serious Sam SE D3D
    14. 29 SeSam SE D3D Detail
    15. 30 Serious Sam SE OGL
    16. 31 SeSam SE OGL Detail
    17. 32 UT2003 Demo FlyBy
    18. UT2003 Demo Botmatch
    19. 33 UT2003 FlyBy Detail
    20. UT2003 Botmatch Detail
    21. 34 Alice
    22. 35 Alice Detail
  10. 36 Conclusion

Comanche4 D3D

Comanche 4 is also quite new Game that makes excessive use of pixel shaders and a large number of polygons to represent the detailed landscape, as well as the beautifully animated water and reflective surfaces. At an average of 30 fps, the polygon throughput is around 6 million per second, a feast for the TnL units. Unfortunately, the benchmark does not allow 1152x864, so this resolution has to be omitted here.

Comanche4 D3D -default
  • 1024x768x32:
    • GF4 Ti4600 (default)
      48.15
    • R9700pro (default)
      46.40
  • 1280x1024x32:
    • GF4 Ti4600 (default)
      46,43
    • R9700pro (default)
      46,24
  • 1600x1200x32:
    • R9700pro (default)
      45,63
    • GF4 Ti4600 (default)
      42,64
  • 1920x1440x32:
    • GF4 Ti4600 (default)
      36,12
    • R9700pro (defau lt)
      33,43

Since the benchmark only offers these resolutions, we have decided to also include the 1920 resolution here. On the one hand, because Comanche4 seems to be quite CPU-limited and on the other hand, to shed light on a Radeon9700 phenomenon, which is only of limited practical relevance, but still worth mentioning: After it was only able to leave the GeForce behind with a resolution of 1600 and higher,the performance in 1920x1440 drops by over a third. This effect occurred in a few tests, in most of which this phenomenon was solved with newer drivers, only Comanche 4 continues to show this extremely strong dip, which makes the Radeon fall behind the GeForce again. The fact that it works so well here seems to be due to the better driver optimization, for which nVidia at least had half a year longer.

Comanche4 D3D quality
  • 1024x768x32:
    • R9700pro (2xAA/4xAF)
      44,41
    • R9700pro (4xAA/8xAF)
      36.26
    • GF4 Ti4600 (2xAA/4xAF)
      35.98
    • R9700pro (6xAA/16xAF)
      29,38
    • GF4 Ti4600 (4xAA/8xAF)
      25.29
    • GF4 Ti4600 (4xS-AA/8xAF)
      17.99
  • 1280x1024x32:
    • R9700pro (2xAA/4xAF )
      37.72
    • R9700pro (4xAA/8xAF)
      28.25
  • GF4 Ti4600 (2xAA/4xAF)
    25.25
  • R9700pro (6xAA/16xAF)
    18.09
  • GF4 Ti4600 (4xAA/8xAF)
    16.43
  • GF4 Ti4600 (4xS-AA/8xAF)
    11.73
  • 1600x1200x32:
    • R9700pro (2xAA/4xAF)
      30.70
    • GF4 Ti4600 (2xAA/4xAF)
      17.24
    • R9700pro (4xAA/8xAF)
      14.73
    • GF4 Ti4600(4xAA/8xAF)
      11.23
    • GF4 Ti4600 (4xS-AA/8xAF)
      8.08
    • R9700pro (6xAA/16xAF)
      2,57
  • 1920x1440x32:
    • R9700pro (2xAA/4xAF)
      12.40
    • GF4 Ti4600 (2xAA/4xAF)
      12.35
    • R9700pro (4xAA/8xAF)
      2.43
    • GF4 Ti4600 (4xAA/8xAF)
      0.00
      switches to 2xFSAA
    • R9700pro (6xAA/16xAF )
      0.00
      does not carry out an FSAA
    • GF4 Ti4600 (4xS-AA/8xAF)
      0.00
      switches to 2xFSAA
  • That the GeForce here compared to the wide distances that it took in the theoretical tests to the Radeon, still keeps up relatively well, may also be due to the successful optimization of the Comanche4 shaders in the drivers. Nevertheless, to speak of a narrow outcome here, where the slower chip is just as fast in the best case as the faster one with a higher setting would be measured. In terms of speed, a clear victory for the Radeon9700pro again.

    C4 -R300 4x-8x.JPG
    C4-nV25 4x-8x.JPG

    Especially the gun bearer on the helicopter can benefit from the better FSAA of the Radeon. The GeForce conjures up slightly sharper textures on the screen, again with the same AF setting of 8x. The differences are by far not as pronounced as in Ultima IX and only on both banks of theRiver halfway clear. In the course of the game this difference is less important than the better anti-aliasing of the Radeon9700pro.

    C4-R300 6x-16x.JPG
    C4-nV25 4xS-8x .JPG

    Basically the same picture is presented here, albeit on a higher level. Edge smoothing goes to the Connect3D and texture quality to the GeForce4. Incidentally, if you are wondering about the missing rocket reflection in the water in the GF4 screenshot: This is simply because the manual triggering of the screenshot button by the author was not carried out properly, i.e. I just pressed too early, you can see also remnants of the yellowish ignition flame ... Our setting-of-choice would be the 37fps that the Radeon is able to render at 1280x1024 with 2xFSAA and 4xAF.

    On the next page: Comanche4 D3D Detail