Anandtech UT2003 Benchies and the ATI 8500
- Thread starter jb
- Start date
LittlePenny
Regular
DaveBaumann said:
Very interesting thought. I don't have any recent games besides SimGolf, but maybe someone knows of a DX texture intensive game where we could test this? Maybe we could find that it is a OpenGL texture read/write error, or if it stutters again, I guess it could be either.
RaolinDarksbane
Newcomer
I don't understand why those games (SoFII or Jedi Knight Outcast) would require a 64+ MB videocard so they would stutter. Does those games uses S3TC? What's the point of texture compression if it isn't used properly?
maybe the issue is that everyone is so used to putting everything on max geometry & texture detail they dont realise that they should be putting newer games down a notch or 2. After all the average mid-1999 card (TNT2, Savage4, V3) didnt play Quake IIIA smooth at HQ settings when it first came out did they?
BTW I'm finding SoF2 MP test a lot smoother than MOH:AA and JKII and SOF2 test has very nice hi-res textures (they look like UT 2nd CD style or maybe just good detail texturing layering).
BTW I'm finding SoF2 MP test a lot smoother than MOH:AA and JKII and SOF2 test has very nice hi-res textures (they look like UT 2nd CD style or maybe just good detail texturing layering).
Doomtrooper
Veteran
I can't say who my source is but I can tell you running the latest DEV drivers there is up to 50 % increase compared to Anands benches, and this was on a fairly lower end Athlon setup.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Do you mean the latest leaked dev drivers, or dev drivers that haven't yet been leaked to the public?
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Joe DeFuria said:
I mean the latest, latest fresh off the press drivers.not leaked yet
Doomtrooper said:Joe DeFuria said:
I mean the latest, latest fresh off the press drivers.not leaked yet
50% increase? OMG I guess the next question is how long before they are leaked? A 50% increase??? I can't believe that, are we talking about ATi here ? Are you sure?
Sabastian
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Sabastian said:Doomtrooper said:Joe DeFuria said:
I mean the latest, latest fresh off the press drivers.not leaked yet
50% increase? OMG I guess the next question is how long before they are leaked? A 50% increase??? I can't believe that, are we talking about ATi here ? Are you sure?
Sabastian
Notice Up to 50%....the information is coming from a reliable source..no FUD.
That doesn't sound unbelievable.. 50%.
After all, we saw a 120-160% improvement in GLExcess scores once the mixed-mode texturing bug in OGL was fixed.
As we cant see the UT2-demo test, it's anyone's guess how applicable a specific driver bug.. or whatever it may be.. these scores reflect. It's pretty obvious from looking at the scores that something is seriously afoot with them.
It's also pretty obvious that this same kind of trend really hasn't been uncovered in *anything* else out there- so if it is indeed a driver bug, it would make sense it would not have been uncovered or isolated until now.
After all, we saw a 120-160% improvement in GLExcess scores once the mixed-mode texturing bug in OGL was fixed.
As we cant see the UT2-demo test, it's anyone's guess how applicable a specific driver bug.. or whatever it may be.. these scores reflect. It's pretty obvious from looking at the scores that something is seriously afoot with them.
It's also pretty obvious that this same kind of trend really hasn't been uncovered in *anything* else out there- so if it is indeed a driver bug, it would make sense it would not have been uncovered or isolated until now.
Doomtrooper said:
Sweet, I have some frends that will be extremely impressed with this bit of news. Thanks Doomtrooper. Will this be a specific API increase like Sharkfood pointed out about GLExcess scores or an overall increase? ATi is really changing impressions about their driver support....good news indeed.
Sabastian
how about this
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1609&p=20
ati aiw 8500 128 gets 35.4 @ 1-24x768....
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1609&p=20
ati aiw 8500 128 gets 35.4 @ 1-24x768....
Okay.. Now I'm *REALLY* confused.
Anand states:
First things first, on the driver spec page it lists the 6043 drivers. Then on the driver spec page of the previous 21-23 fps benchies, it also lists the 6043 drivers. Is there some typo or something I'm missing here? How could the same drivers "mature" between runs?
I'm happy Anand finally figured out how to flash a BIOS. This is good news and should be kind of "status quo" when testing systems. Somehow I doubt this had much impact on the improvement though.
Lastly, I'm confused about the 8500 tests (not the AIW 8500DV 128MB). The stock 8500 has changed from 21.x to 26.x fps between the tests. This is still far, far, far below what it should be reading (roughly half) when compared to the Ti500.
I have no idea what's up with this test but I really wish some site with some credence or PC/diagnostic/3D skills would pick up an 8500 and actually look into this with some hopes of creating some clarity on the matter. It just seems the more Anand posts, the more bizarre and strange the results.
Anand states:
First things first, on the driver spec page it lists the 6043 drivers. Then on the driver spec page of the previous 21-23 fps benchies, it also lists the 6043 drivers. Is there some typo or something I'm missing here? How could the same drivers "mature" between runs?
I'm happy Anand finally figured out how to flash a BIOS. This is good news and should be kind of "status quo" when testing systems. Somehow I doubt this had much impact on the improvement though.
Lastly, I'm confused about the 8500 tests (not the AIW 8500DV 128MB). The stock 8500 has changed from 21.x to 26.x fps between the tests. This is still far, far, far below what it should be reading (roughly half) when compared to the Ti500.
I have no idea what's up with this test but I really wish some site with some credence or PC/diagnostic/3D skills would pick up an 8500 and actually look into this with some hopes of creating some clarity on the matter. It just seems the more Anand posts, the more bizarre and strange the results.
As much as I'd like to be in Anand's position where I continually get the latest UPT build, I would simply suggest that we discard Anand's UPT's scores, in the past as well as present. Too many stuff to cover and with Anand not (bothering?) to ask what sort of changes every new build means (whole lotta stuff to cover!), it's simply a guessing game. It would've been easier if Anand stuck with the same build for every tests/reviews but I suppose that's unlikely (even for me!).
Until, a detailed explanation of what the test involves (in terms of changes, from build to build) and this is updated for every build in every article, it really is a "see it, read it, forget it". For me, at least.
Until, a detailed explanation of what the test involves (in terms of changes, from build to build) and this is updated for every build in every article, it really is a "see it, read it, forget it". For me, at least.
In Anand's latest article, the ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon 8500 128MB, he re-ran the Unreal Performance Test 2002.
Here's what he states :
Unlike what we saw in our latest roundup, the Radeon cards do a lot better in the UPT benchmark. It would seem as if the poor scores in the previous roundup could be attributed to a combination of an older BIOS revision on the EPoX board and the latest ATI drivers. We'll be re-running those scores right away and will update the review accordingly.
So, a simple mistake?
Here's what he states :
Unlike what we saw in our latest roundup, the Radeon cards do a lot better in the UPT benchmark. It would seem as if the poor scores in the previous roundup could be attributed to a combination of an older BIOS revision on the EPoX board and the latest ATI drivers. We'll be re-running those scores right away and will update the review accordingly.
So, a simple mistake?
Read my first reply concerning "human error"
I'm with Rev on this one. All the UPT scores that have poured out of this site are pretty much useless information.
As there has been little to no emphasis on what's actually being tested from revision to revision, along with a trend that fails to identify or question unusual behavior, this kind of invalidates these scores from serving any purpose. The results are totally in a vacuum.
Add to this a disparity in results on nearly identical conditions between two reviews.. (only documented to be a simply BIOS flash)... it all adds up to some rather self-defeating, confusing and literally unusable data.
I'm with Rev on this one. All the UPT scores that have poured out of this site are pretty much useless information.
As there has been little to no emphasis on what's actually being tested from revision to revision, along with a trend that fails to identify or question unusual behavior, this kind of invalidates these scores from serving any purpose. The results are totally in a vacuum.
Add to this a disparity in results on nearly identical conditions between two reviews.. (only documented to be a simply BIOS flash)... it all adds up to some rather self-defeating, confusing and literally unusable data.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
I will be honest, I think Anandtech has gone down hill bigtime, his CPU articles, motherboard etc... are usually quite good but his Video Card reviews have gone down hill.
If you look at the older 3DFX vs. Nvidia Vs. ATI comparisons there was lots of screen shots and much more indepth testing.
If you look at the older 3DFX vs. Nvidia Vs. ATI comparisons there was lots of screen shots and much more indepth testing.
Are these the ones that you are talking about Doomtropper? According to this thread they are old, relatively speaking of course..
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=8a15cada38ac3670438fb57f7acb794e&threadid=33615048
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=8a15cada38ac3670438fb57f7acb794e&threadid=33615048
Sabastian said:Are these the ones that you are talking about Doomtropper? According to this thread they are old, relatively speaking of course..
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=8a15cada38ac3670438fb57f7acb794e&threadid=33615048
Yes, enquiring minds would like to know!