Tech-Hounds.com

HDR and Transparency Anti Aliasing Performance

Naturally, some of you will want to see what the GeForce 8800GTS 640 and 320 MB have to offer in this area. Since the GeForce 7950GT does not support using floating point HDR and anti aliasing at the same time, the only point of reference we can use is the Radeon X1950 Pro. Keep in mind that this is not a direct comparison - the Radeon X1950 Pro is only a reference point.

Serious Sam II - Greendale

High Dynamic Range Rendering, 4xAA 16xAF

	1024 x 768	1280 x 960	1600 x 1200
GeForce 8800GTS 640
Mininum fps	71	54	38
Average fps	87.78	68.85	50.07
Maximum fps	113	94	68
GeForce 8800GTS 320
Mininum fps	71	52	37
Average fps	88.08	66.28	48.04
Maximum fps	119	89	66
Radeon X1950 Pro
Mininum fps	34	27	18
Average fps	47.07	36.9	24.47
Maximum fps	63	50	34

Transparency Supersampling / Adaptive Quality, 4xAA 16xAF

	1024 x 768	1280 x 960	1600 x 1200
GeForce 8800GTS 640
Mininum fps	35	27	20
Average fps	39.6	30.49	22.97
Maximum fps	47	36	28
GeForce 8800GTS 320
Mininum fps	34	26	20
Average fps	38.96	29.84	22.39
Maximum fps	46	36	28
GeForce 7950GT
Mininum fps	24	19	13
Average fps	28.5	21.58	15.43
Maximum fps	36	28	20
Radeon X1950 Pro
Mininum fps	16	14	10
Average fps	21.84	17.4	12.83
Maximum fps	29	24	18

Looking at these numbers, its easy to see that we're not going to see a graphics card that can do 4x transparency / adaptive anti aliasing with supersampling that can push high enough frame rates at 1600 x 1200 or even 1280 x 960 anytime soon. HDR and AA / AF is a different matter and a much 'achievable' proposition at this time. We did some testing with HDR and AA / AF in Oblivion and generally find the GeForce 8800GTS 640 and 320 MB are able to push around a minimum fps of 35 fps and an average fps of 42 fps at 1280 x 1024, which is high enough for comfortable gameplay.

Conclusion:

Today, we've been quite fortunate to be able to spend time with the more affordable versions of the GeForce 8800 series - the GeForce 8800GTS 640 and 320 MB. The GeForce 8800GTS and the GeForce 8 series in general brought much to the table. On the top of the list are much higher quality, angle independent anisotropic filtering and an improved 4x MSAA - clearly two much needed improvements over the last generation of products from NVIDIA. Add to that support for DirectX 10, shader processing performance and much quicker time to market, its no wonder the GeForce 8800 series quickly became the high end graphics card of choice for demanding, image quality conscious gamers. Don't left out its jump in performance over current generation of cards.

Still, there are still some aspects we wish NVIDIA had address with the GeForce 8800 series. Our long standing critic of AA performance penalty quickly comes to mind - it would seem the GeForce 8800 series (in our particular case, the GeForce 8800GTS) still loses about 30 to 50 percent performance with AA enabled. Granted, that loss may not be always visible to users, since these cards have so much performance that our overclocked E6300 at 2.8 GHz has trouble keeping up. But with higher resolutions and in graphically intensive scenes, this old NVIDIA Achilles heel often rears its ugly head.

The loss of 8xS multisampling (8x multisampling plus 2x supersampling) is also a disappointment. Sure, 8x CSAA and 8xQ MSAA with little performance penalty is nice, but there are cases where 8xS is still better. We actually prefer to have 8xS over 16xQ and 16x CSAA any day. As for 8x CSAA, though it is nice, it's still no replacement for 'true' 8x multisampling, which thankfully is available in the form of 8xQ. However, most users will likely not to be much bothered with this.

Another area which users will likely notice is performance with shader bound games. In our benchmark suite, we find the GeForce 8800GTS, both 640 MB and 320 MB versions are unable to provide high enough 'sustainable' frame rates with 'all the bells and whistles' turned on with AA and AF at 1600 x 1200. Take another look at our benchmarks results from F.E.A.R, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion and Need for Speed: Carbon. Both GeForce 8800GTS clearly do not have enough performance to push these shader bound games at 1600 x 1200 with 4x AA and 16x AF enabled and all  the settings 'maxed out'. It's just barely coping at that resolution - dropping to 30 fps or lower in some occasion. That honor seems reserved for the GeForce 8800GTX and the recently launched GeForce 8800 Ultra. Is this a bad thing? Not really, but users who need and want to play next generation games at 1600 x 1200 (or higher) with AA and AF should not expect much from a high-end, value focused parts.

Since there are no DirectX 10 titles or independent benchmarks available, synthetic or otherwise, we were not able to provide a look at how these cards will perform with next generation titles making use of DirectX 10 or the new Vista driver model. Thankfully, the driver situation (on both camps) is improving, but we think until the launch of DirectX 10 titles, manufacturers first priority should be to provide the best experience with current titles - that means more stable, higher performance drivers for current DirectX 9 titles. What does mean to users like you? Well, we actually don't recommend you buying the GeForce 8800 series of cards because of DirectX 10 support - buy it because it currently offers the best bundle of performance and quality. If next generation performance is very important to you, then you would be wise to wait until benchmarks with next generation titles are available to see if the GeForce 8800 series have 'what it takes'.

[Previous Page]
[Go to top]
[Home]