finally an official HL2 stress test... test

[gururu]

firingsquad

 

[Insomniak]

Looks like the X800 series has a nice 10 - 20% performance lead in most situations.

However, just like with Doom 3, both camps cards play the game just fine.


Bottom line: Both ATi and Nvidia's new chips can play all the games you want to play.


Kthxbye!

 

[Schadenfroh]

why dont the use a regular x800 XT to test against a 6800 ultra? isnt the PE's MSRP $50 more than the XT?

 

[gururu]

the beautiful thing is that ALL the cards run it amazingly fast with high settings. even my ol' 9700pro.

 

[Bar81]

This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

 

[Bar81]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
why dont the use a regular x800 XT to test against a 6800 ultra? isnt the PE's MSRP $50 more than the XT?

No, they're the same price. Besides, the XT doesn't come in AGP flavor.

 

[DarkKnight]

HL2 looks beautiful AND runs fast. :thumbsup:

 

[gururu]

Originally posted by: Bar81
This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

well, its an official test, so I don't think Valve would try to mislead the masses 'too' much. worst case, I gotta run 1024 with high settings....
i'm just thrilled that I may not have to run out and get a better card.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Bar81
This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

Not as syntetic as 3dmark. This is the real game and this shows what the what game will require your graphics to do. Its if your card run this, its going to run the game just fine. That being said, ATi and nvidias cards play the game just fine. How many of us even have monitors with refresh rates over 72?

 

[Childs]

The 59XX cards are faster than the 9800 cards, minus the XT? Thats strange.

Also, anyone know how to do the benchmarks yourself?

 

[gururu]

Originally posted by: Childs
The 59XX cards are faster than the 9800 cards, minus the XT? Thats strange.

Also, anyone know how to do the benchmarks yourself?

its cause they are running dx8 but the 9800s are running dx9. the 59xx cards aren't allowed to run dx9 because they are far too slow (or so Valve claims)

 

[g3pro]

Can't wait for it to be released on torrent!

 

[Cat]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: Bar81
This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

Not as syntetic as 3dmark. This is the real game and this shows what the what game will require your graphics to do. Its if your card run this, its going to run the game just fine. That being said, ATi and nvidias cards play the game just fine. How many of us even have monitors with refresh rates over 72?

I don't think I've used a monitor without a refresh rate of at least 85Hz at my normal resolutions. (1280x960, 1600x1200) for years. I usually use 100Hz, and can tell the difference between 85 and 100 now. How can you stand 75Hz? (This excludes LCDs)

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Looks like the X800 series has a nice 10 - 20% performance lead in most situations.

However, just like with Doom 3, both camps cards play the game just fine.


Bottom line: Both ATi and Nvidia's new chips can play all the games you want to play.


Kthxbye!

That's the truth bro...
:beer:

 

[thelanx]

Why didn't they do any benchmarks without aa and af for the high end cards? They tested the gen2 cards without aa and af, so I don't see why they didn't test the higher end cards. While it makes sense that if you got such a high end card you would want to use aa and af, it would be interesting.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: Tabb
How many of us even have monitors with refresh rates over 72?

I do. Mine does an amazing 85Hz @ 1024x768.

 

[KevinH]

Originally posted by: gururu
the beautiful thing is that ALL the cards run it amazingly fast with high settings. even my ol' 9700pro.

Hell yeah! This is further proof that the 9700pro was so far ahead of it's time. I just finished D3 @ 10x7/high using it and in games frames were generall high 40's low 50's, rarely dropping into the 30/20's. To think that I can also run HL2 with wat appears with ease is great to know. Looks like it was a good thing i didn't pull the trigger on a video card upgrade just yet.

 

[KevinH]

Originally posted by: Cat

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: Bar81
This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

Not as syntetic as 3dmark. This is the real game and this shows what the what game will require your graphics to do. Its if your card run this, its going to run the game just fine. That being said, ATi and nvidias cards play the game just fine. How many of us even have monitors with refresh rates over 72?

I don't think I've used a monitor without a refresh rate of at least 85Hz at my normal resolutions. (1280x960, 1600x1200) for years. I usually use 100Hz, and can tell the difference between 85 and 100 now. How can you stand 75Hz? (This excludes LCDs)

Same. Almost every CRt I've owned or used at work has been at least 75 Hz. None of my own personal CRT's have been less than 85Hz.

 

[imported_Apophis]

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Looks like the X800 series has a nice 10 - 20% performance lead in most situations.

However, just like with Doom 3, both camps cards play the game just fine.


Bottom line: Both ATi and Nvidia's new chips can play all the games you want to play.


Kthxbye!

Thanks for this awesome post man.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Can anyone explain how the heck a 9800XT can be faster than a 9800 Pro 256MB by 25% at 10x7 / 4xAA / 8xAF, despite having a mere 30MHz faster core/mem clock?

Something to do with 9800XT HL2 vouchers?

 

[Childs]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Can anyone explain how the heck a 9800XT can be faster than a 9800 Pro 256MB by 25% at 10x7 / 4xAA / 8xAF, despite having a mere 30MHz faster core/mem clock?

Something to do with 9800XT HL2 vouchers?

I didnt understand that either.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

I don't think they used the same benchmark for the high end cards that they did for the midrange. The 6800 nu has different framerates.

why dont the use a regular x800 XT to test against a 6800 ultra? isnt the PE's MSRP $50 more than the XT?

XTPE MRSP = $500. XT MSRP = $450. AFAIK Nvidia does not have a $450 MSRP card.

ATI has opened up a bigger lead in HL2 than Nvidia had in D3 at the $500 pricepoint.

 

[Shamrock]

Originally posted by: gururu

Originally posted by: Bar81
This is only a synthetic test. Wait until the real gameplay benchmark hits before you declare your card will play it just fine at certain settings.

well, its an official test, so I don't think Valve would try to mislead the masses 'too' much. worst case, I gotta run 1024 with high settings....
i'm just thrilled that I may not have to run out and get a better card.

Hey, Valve had to please the people someway, they figure they would keep everyone happy at least another 9 months....

until another hacker steals the code and delays HL2, AGAIN, right?

 

[Alkaline5]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
I don't think they used the same benchmark for the high end cards that they did for the midrange. The 6800 nu has different framerates.

XTPE MRSP = $500. XT MSRP = $450. AFAIK Nvidia does not have a $450 MSRP card.

ATI doesn't have a $450 retail card either. The X800 XT is only PCI-E and OEM currently.

ATI has opened up a bigger lead in HL2 than Nvidia had in D3 at the $500 pricepoint.

That's true, but the X800 Pro and the 6800GT are very close. In D3 they are terribly mismatched.

 

[FluxCap]

Originally posted by: Alkaline5

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
I don't think they used the same benchmark for the high end cards that they did for the midrange. The 6800 nu has different framerates.

XTPE MRSP = $500. XT MSRP = $450. AFAIK Nvidia does not have a $450 MSRP card.

ATI doesn't have a $450 retail card either. The X800 XT is only PCI-E and OEM currently.

ATI has opened up a bigger lead in HL2 than Nvidia had in D3 at the $500 pricepoint.

That's true, but the X800 Pro and the 6800GT are very close. In D3 they are terribly mismatched.

Yeah, I agree. For $400 it would be wise to get the GT, for $500 try your best to find an XT PE. I might continue my search for an XT PE in October when I trade up my eVGA.