Supposed futuremark score on 6600

[ERP]

If I were a betting man..... which I'm not.

I'd guess it was the Z Reject rate..... Since Z rejects in good cases on Nvidia cards do not hit the external bus at all.

 

[vb]

So what exactly makes this card approx. 2x faster in doom3 than pcx 5900 (which has 256bit mem.)?
And even if 5900 can do 16 z operations and this card only 8 (as I've understood from vb's post) per clock?

5900 is an 8x0/4x2 e.g. 8z op per clock/4 color pixels just like 6600. What does make a difference is that 6600 has far more extensive fragment processing abilities: 8 pipes, each more powerful than 5900's ones

(Till now I thought NV43 will be same as 6800gt/U, except only 2 quads and only 3 ps, therefore able to do 16z ops/8normal ops per clock and output only 4 (as it's mem bus has half the bandwidth oposed to GT/U))

Can anyone make it clear to me, how it really works and why has it so high scores in doom3 and 3dmark 2003?

See above

I thought that performance is the only thing that counts. Not nr of pipelines or Z fillrate.

There is no denying Nvidias architecture, being able to output "zixels" 2x the nr of pipelines, was/is targeted at Doom3 style rendering

My main gripe is calling NV43 "the doom3 GPU" while it is the first from Nvidia in 2 years that doesn't feature 2x Z-fill rate.

Just that. whether it has performance to match or the means it achieves that performance I'll have to debate when i'll see any decent reviews. I haven't yet and I am not arguing that. we all know the superior OpenGL drivers of Nv cards, drivers tuned to the fragment program of Doom3 and so on [/quote]

 

[Bjorn]

Just that. whether it has performance to match or the means it achieves that performance I'll have to debate when i'll see any decent reviews. I haven't yet and I am not arguing that. we all know the superior OpenGL drivers of Nv cards, drivers tuned to the fragment program of Doom3 and so o

I'd like to wait for the reviews myself also. But Nvidia's "Doom 3 GPU" claims are based on the supposed Doom 3 performance and it's certainly seems to match those claims if the nr's are correct.

 

[Mendel]

I'd like to wait for the reviews myself also. But Nvidia's "Doom 3 GPU" claims are based on the supposed Doom 3 performance and it's certainly seems to match those claims if the nr's are correct.

Even though on their own benchmarks they played a bit with the settings. Claimed "high quality" although AF was disabled...

That could be a way of admitting it gets a huge hit from AF, or it could just mean their benchmarking skills are a bit lacking