Tech-Hounds.com

Because gamers play games, not benchmarks






6 Quad







Bilinear Trilinear 2xAF 4xAF 8xAF 16xAF 4xAA Bilinear 4xAA 16xAF
Min 47 45 44 43 44 45 40 38
Avg 119.65 109.32 112.45 106.85 103.14 103.9 72.27 61.84
Max 380 238 381 399 306 318 249 137










5 Quad







Bilinear Trilinear 2xAF 4xAF 8xAF 16xAF 4xAA Bilinear 4xAA 16xAF
Min 48 46 44 46 46 44 38 36
Avg 112.13 107.92 100.82 97.75 99.64 98.07 69.22 61.94
Max 372 350 215 203 354 272 199 217










4 Quad







Bilinear Trilinear 2xAF 4xAF 8xAF 16xAF 4xAA Bilinear 4xAA 16xAF
Min 46 43 46 44 43 42 34 31
Avg 103.03 99.23 97.25 91.29 89.6 89.23 65.7 58.66
Max 374 386 356 335 27 299 249 223

With the maximum fps out of the way, we can finally see just how much frames are lost to AA - around 40 fps, regardless of the number of quads. With 6 quads, we still have some elbow room with pure AA, but that's also gone as soon as we enable 16x AF. F.E.A.R does behave differently compared to Quake 4. It looks like we do gain frame rates with each quad in both AA and AF, not just AF. Let's see the differences per quad just to be sure.


Bilinear Trilinear 2xAF 4xAF 8xAF 16xAF 4xAA Bilinear 4xAA 16xAF
5 to 6 Quad







Min -2.08% -2.17% 0.00% -6.52% -4.35% 2.27% 5.26% 5.56%
Avg
6.70% 1.29% 11.53% 9.31% 3.51% 5.95% 4.40% -0.15%
Max
2.15% -32.00% 77.21% 96.55% -13.56% 16.91% 25.13% -36.87%









4 to 5 Quad







Min 4.35% 6.98% -4.35% 4.55% 6.98% 4.76% 11.76% 16.13%
Avg
8.84% 8.76% 3.68% 7.08% 11.21% 9.91% 5.36% 5.60%
Max
-0.53% -9.33% -39.61% -39.40% 1211.11% -9.03% -20.08% -2.69%









Per Quad (Average)







Min 1.13% 2.40% -2.17% -0.99% 1.31% 3.52% 8.51% 10.84%
Avg
7.77% 5.03% 7.60% 8.19% 7.36% 7.93% 4.88% 2.72%
Max
0.81% -20.66% 18.80% 28.57% 598.78% 3.94% 2.52% -19.78%

Well, by looking at this table we can say that just like Quake 4, the GeForce 7 gain the most in F.E.A.R by moving from 4 to 5 quads. However, we can also see that unlike Quake 3, F.E.A.R does gain more frames with pure AA than AF. In fact, we gain almost nothing in AF by moving from 5 to 6 quads. The results with various filtering settings are quite interesting. We mentioned earlier that enabling anisotropy 2x AF and 4x AF is different to bilinear and trilinear. Here we can see we actually gain more with 6 quads than 5 under those settings. But in the more used mode such as bilinear, trilinear, 8x AF and 16x AF, we gain less with 6 quads. Let's move on to the next table.

6 Quad




AA (with Bilinear) AA (with 16x AF) 16x AF (with Bilinear) 16x AF (with AA)
Difference (Min) 14.89% 15.56% 4.26% 0.66%
Difference (Avg) 39.60% 40.48% 13.16% 0.88%
Difference (Max) 34.47% 56.92% 16.32% 22.44%





5 Quad




AA (with Bilinear) AA (with 16x AF) 16x AF (with Bilinear) 16x AF (with AA)
Difference (Min) 20.83% 18.18% 8.33% -2.65%
Difference (Avg) 38.27% 36.84% 12.54% -1.43%
Difference (Max) 46.51% 20.22% 26.88% -26.28%





4 Quad




AA (with Bilinear) AA (with 16x AF) 16x AF (with Bilinear) 16x AF (with AA)
Difference (Min) 26.09% 26.19% 8.70% 0.10%
Difference (Avg) 36.23% 34.26% 13.39% -1.96%
Difference (Max) 33.42% 25.42% 20.05% -8.00%

Well, this is more like it. We can see that performance penalty with AA is pretty high and still pretty much the same, regardless of the number of quads. If there were differences, it's around 5 percent and not really noticeable in gameplay. This is true for both pure AA and AA with AF. In any case, these differences could be caused by normal variations between runs. In additon, we can also see AF penalty is pretty much the same regardless of the number of quads and not noticeable at all (between 1 -2 percent). .

[Previous Page]
[Go to top]
[Next Page]
Disclaimer and Privacy policy.