Quake 4, Data Processing Terminal, 1024 x
768
ASUS EN8600GTS
Gigabyte NX8600GTS
SilentPipe 3
MSI NX8600GTS OC
Edition
Leadtek PX8600GTS TDH
Extreme
Quake 4, Data Processing Terminal, 1280 x
1024
ASUS EN8600GTS
Gigabyte NX8600GTS
SilentPipe 3
MSI NX8600GTS OC
Edition
Leadtek PX8600GTS TDH
Extreme
Quake 4, Data Processing Terminal, 1600 x
1200
ASUS EN8600GTS
Gigabyte NX8600GTS
SilentPipe 3
MSI NX8600GTS OC
Edition
Leadtek PX8600GTS TDH
Extreme
Quake 4 is a much 'forgiving' game graphically compared to F.E.A.R, so here we're seeing much higher frame rates. Because of this, we can actually turn 4x MSAA on and 'absorb' the performance penalty up to 1280 x 1024. This is the point where these cards is still able to provide minimum frame rates above 30 fps. Please note that because the game has a frame rate cap of 60 fps, you'll likely don't see these levels of frame rates when you're actually playing the game. However, this is not true for minimum frame rates.
Back to our comparison, how do each card fare? Well, the Leadtek PX8600GTS TDH Extreme once again offer higher average frame rates both at 1024 x 768 and 1280 x 1024 with AA and AF enabled. However, you'll only get higher minimum frame rates at 1024 x 768 with AA and AF. If you are willing to forsake AA or need to play at 1600 x 1200, all these cards are fast enough. Again, because of the core and shader clock advantage, the Leadtek PX8600GTS TDH Extreme is able to offer around 10 percent higher frame rate overall.
To put things into perspective once again, while the Leadtek card is prove to be faster, it's simply faster in settings where your standard clocked GeForce 8600GTS is fast enough. Don't expect the addtional clock increase to offer any significant gains in frame rates. You notice that it still is not able to push high enough frame rates at 1600 x 1200 with AA and AF. Of course, you can always overclock the card, but then again, you could overclock all of these cards here.
[Previous Page]
[Go to top]
[Next Page]