Tests of six video cards at first DX10 gaming benchmarks
Tests in Call of Juarez DX10 Demo
As we already stated, this benchmark is made as a standalone application, with a special launcher used to start the game and control the graphic settings. Below you can see a screenshot with pre-set "Low" quality settings.
Of the options available to modify, there is only the screen resolution and the details level, The "Advanced Settings" section displays detailed graphics quality settings which conform to the selected "Details" level. We run the first test at the minimum settings.
At these settings, Radeon HD2900XT takes a lead, with 8800GTX lagging behind just a little bit. The pair 8800GTS 640/320 is still demonstrating a stable parity of results. But for the pair 8600GTS 512/256 the results immediately separated. The 8600GTS 512 MB version looks more attractive, although it does not demonstrate a comfortable FPS.
The "Balanced" level of details differs from the minimum settings in that simple shadows of objects and FSAA 2? are enabled.
At that as well, Radeon HD2900XT performs not bad, but at 1600?1200 it anyway proves to be inferior to 8800GTX. The results for the pair 8800GTS 640/320 fall apart because the 640 MB version appears to be more attractive, which is natural. However sad it is, we have to admit that the performance of the regular 8600GTS drops well below the acceptable level. The 8600GTS 512 MB version demonstrates a threefold performance boost as compared to it, but that can be regarded as no more than an accelerated slide show.
The "High" graphics settings make use of even higher rate of FSAA and object shadows.
In the rivalry between Radeon HD2900XT and GeForce 8800GTX, the struggle is going on at a varying success. Substantial changes can be seen in the results for the pair 8800GTS 640/320. At 1600?1200, the 320 MB version sharply drops so that it even performs worse than the 8600GTS 512 MB version. The results for 8600GTS 256 MB don't need any comments - all is evident.
Let's try to find out what the cause of such sharp drops in results is – is it the shadow details level or the rate of FSAA? To this end, we'll do the following. We disable the FSAA in the details settings without changing any other options as it is shown on the screenshot.
Comparing this diagram with the previous one, we arrive at the conclusion it is anyway the FSAA which is in charge of the so sharp drop of results at the "High" details level. If we disable it, the drop of performance for 8800GTS 320 MB will vanish immediately. The results for Radeon HD2900XT will also go up substantially. Nevertheless, the performance of GeForce 8800GTX is affected by the presence/lack of FSAA in a much less extent. Quite possibly, enabling the FSAA results in increased consumption of video memory. But as we already stated above, it is still impossible to clarify this point at a sufficient certainty.
Final Words
Let's sum up the first totals. Comparison of video cards tested in DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 has shown that increase in realism results in a substantial drop of the FPS level. That's understandable - it is a tradeoff for the "nicety". The requirements to the video memory capacity are also high enough, even at relatively "easy" modes. Modern top-end video cards still don't demonstrate a smashing performance at DirectX 10, but they are able showing quite a comfortable FPS although not at the maximum settings. The performance of mid-end video cards still leaves much to be desired. All in all, it would not be wise to make far-reaching forecasts based on merely two benchmarks one of which is still a pure demo. On the other hand, games are not yet optimized for DirectX. Both game developers and video processor manufacturers still have a long way to go to make the new graphics an enjoyable experience. Let's wait and see.
- Discuss the material in a forum.
 |
Top Stories: |
 |
 |
|
MoBo:
| |
|
|
VGA Card:
|
|
|
|
CPU & Memory:
|
|
