Who winning reviewers / benchmark on next gen cards chart

Thanks for the comments.

I used 4X AA since most of the reviews benchmarked with 4X AA exclusively. But I did make a generalized statement in regards to 6X AA in observation 4 at the bottom of the chart.

Reviews from the large web sites should have included benchmark results with 6X AA. I've read many complaints about how HardOCP presents their benchmark results, but when you understand what they are doing, they can make quite an impact:

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNl8yX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfN181X2wuZ2lm

As for the resolution, I found that if card A beats card B at 1024x768, it usually ends up beating it at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200. But the results marked with a draw are subjective and occur for a variety of reasons. One example is with F1 Challenge in Anandtech's review:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044&p=15

With 4X AA and 8X AF, the X800 XT wins at 1280x1024 and the 6800 Ultra wins at 1600x1200. I made it easy on myself and called it a draw

Another case is where X-bit labs used two different maps in UT2003. The 6800U won in one map and the X800 XT won in the other map.

 

4x AA is the only setting that both have. ATI has useable 6x AA, but Nvidia doesn't- it has 8x AA that slows down gameplay too much to accurately compare, even though it looks better.

 

Nvidia's multi-sampling tops out at 4xAA, so they need to enable super-sampling as well and go hybrid for any mode above that which means the performance tanks. One result of this is that if you max out IQ settings ATI is going to win hands down but this won't give a representative sample for a lot of people because NV users don't normally use anything above 4xAA and comparing that to ATI's 6xAA would skew the performance charts in NV's favor.

Sadly, I don't see it changing any time soon. But at least with both now offering 16xAF we may see that used more often rather than limiting comparisons to 8xAF as was common before.

 

Yeah I really liked the way that [H] did those benches. It shows realitive performance (frame rate) at different resolutions. like these examples. [H] was the best review IMO.(with the exception of B3Ds of course. 8) )

Farcry..

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNF8yX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNF81X2wuanBn

Splinter Cell

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNV8yX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNV83X2wuanBn

Need For Speed

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNl8yX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNl8zX2wuanBn

Flight Simulator 2004

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNl85X2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfNl8xMF9sLmpwZw==

Unreal Tournament 2004

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfN18yX2wuZ2lm

Best Playable IQ:

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4MzU2NDE4OTg4OEFkazcwdGVfMTBfMV9sLmdpZg==

This is by far the most objective review from a gamers viewpoint that you could ask for... Shame you aren't able to add them in because of the nature of their tests.

I saw a number of reviews where indeed the GF 6 rivaled the X800XT in 1024x768 but when the IQ was turned up the X800XT really pulled ahead by clear margins.

I also noticed that AA on ATi cards is far better..

2X AA

Radeon X800 XT
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=x800-2xaa.png

GeForce 6800 Ultra
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=6800-2xaa.png

4X AA

Radeon X800 XT
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=x800-4xaa.png

GeForce 6800 Ultra
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=6800-4xaa.png

6XAA vs 8XAA
6X AA - Radeon X800 XT
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=x800-6xaa.png

8X AA - GeForce 6800 Ultra
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=6800-8xaa.png

So even the comparisons of the AA levels are not a fair comparison because each IHV uses a different measuring stick in their AA implementation. ATi seems to have better quality at all levels except none of course. Even their 6XAA does more to enhance the IQ then NV 8X quality. To actually compare these cards based simply on AA you might consider allowing for 2XAA on ATi cards while using 4XAA on NV cards as the output is more similar.

2XAA Radeon X800 XT
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=x800-2xaa.png

4XAA GeForce 6800 Ultra
http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/radeon-x800/image.x?img=6800-4xaa.png

Heh, wouldn't that affect the wins vs losses. 8)

 

Come on, the IQ differences btw the two cards are damn near negligible. The 'let's compare ATI's 2X to NVIDIA's 4X' argument doesn't hold weight anymore.

 

While Nvidia's 4x has gotten better with the NV4x generation (moving to a rotated grid really helps), it's still not quite as good as ATI's because of the lack of gamma correction, but it's much closer. Having said that, none of Nvidia's AA modes handle edges quite as well as ATI's 6x, and the performance hit of the hybrid modes renders them almost unusable in newer games.

 

well i've been playing around with temporal aa . I can't run it on many games because i need to have the fps over 60. But i loaded up quake 3 put it at 800x600 and put on 6x fsaa temporal. Let me tell u . I could have made love to the image. IT was beautifull . So even if i can only use that on the current games i have i still have to give image quality to ati.

 

All I know is that there is a glaring difference in the AA quality between the different AA modes ATi and nVidia use. The pictures defiantly speak for themselves.

 

That's no more true with the 6800....

 

I think the chart is fine now, why complicate it with more detail.

Concentrate on AA/AF - thats what people want. Remember hardly anyone tested with 6xAA. Mike's observations therefore make that point.

Now a 6800 GT or 6800 vanilla v X800Pro should be worthwile as the most likley cards for prople to buy.

 

One thing that chart tells us is that reviewers have a long way to go. Last generation we rarely saw 16x AF used on the Radeon. Why? Because nVidia didn't have it (??!!!) This time around we rarely see 6x AA used, when it was it was compared to a mixed mode rather than dedicated MSAA (???!!!)

How can anyone can do IQ comparisons without comparing all the options I really don't know.

 

16AF is now available, so it shouldn't be difficult to see those in the near future. As for 6*AA, well, it's sure is an issue.

 

I don't know that Evildeus. Take another look at these shots and tell me the NVs AA is on par with ATi AA.

 

When I look at these HardOCP COD shots, 4AA looks better on the X800 versus the 6800U too …

… hardcop…

 

From [H] (and as the AA is the same on R420 and R360)
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA2LDM=

 

"Very similar" is not "the same." Nvidia's AA has gotten better, specifically their 4x mode, but ATI does still have the edge.

 

Did i say they were identical? I said that the "glaring difference in the AA quality between the different AA modes ATi and nVidia use" is no more true. It does seem that the AA differiencies are now difficult to point out (in 4*AA)

 

OK, I'll post the pics for direct comparisons then. Look at the wings. Its obvious to me that the lines are less jaggy on the X800XT.

Radeon X800XT 2XAA



Geforce 6800 Ultra 2XAA



The higher you go with the AA on the X800XT the AA simply appears to be doing more for IQ. While on the 6800 Ultra the 4XAA is nearly identical to its 8XAA. The 6XAA on the X800XT is far better then any AA setting on the Geforce 6800 Ultra. That is a fairly objective observation it is pretty difficult to dispute. The Radeon's X800XT 2XAA is doing as much for IQ as the 6800s 4XAA. The Gama correction really makes a huge difference.

 

Well Sabastian all the review i've seen say the contrary, you can't distinguish 4*AA from the 6800 and the X800. You are comparing 2*AA and 2*AA, will trying to say that 2*AA on the X800 is almost identical, which can be done if you don't give me a 4*AA from Nv . Sure Ati is going further, but @ 4*AA there's no glaring differencies.

PS: Why doing on 2*AA on a 6800 or X800??
*edit* FYI:
9800XT

6800U

 

I would love to see a benchmark or every game with the highest settings for both cards. Max quality, and max AA/AF included with every game. One more test shouldnt be too hard..

Evildeus, games are the only thing that matters.