Dear god... those screenshots look closer to UT than UT2003. Even if the thing could render DOOM3 faster than a NV30, I wouldn't touch something with such poor texture quality. Default texture filtering seems to be forced Crapilinearâ„¢ with massive LOD crappification... ugh.
Adding insult to injury, changing the texture quality from "God-Awful" to "merely crappy" causes performance to drop by an amazing amount! Its as if the Xabre's trilinear filtering suffers from the same performance hit as the GeForce4's anisotropic.
Also, the benchmarks are done on a 3.06 GHz Pentium IV, but I doubt a Xabre buyer would have such a high end CPU. More likely, he will have a crappier CPU, and as SiS's own boasts about CPU scaling show, that should cause the Xabre's performance to drop dramatically.
Sure, the Xabre has reasonable framerate/performance ratio with "turbo textures 3" setting... but I could just as easily set a Radeon9000 to bilinear sampling, massive positive LOD bias, and turn off a bunch of sprites and lighting effects to get much better framerates. The Xabre also seems to be doing more of the "quake/quack" thing that got Radeons into a lot of trouble. Blek. The Xabre is one videocard I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
