Tech-Hounds.com

A Direct Comparison of Radeon X700 Pro and GeForce 6600GT - Part 2

PCI Express x16 graphics cards
Chipset Radeon X700 Pro 256 MB, 128 bit, GeForce 6600 128 MB, 128 bit

We've concluded in the first part (which you can find here) that for now, as a whole, the Radeon X700 Pro delivers the better hardware and software package that gamers want – a good enough performance (ranging from nearly as fast or sometimes faster), better image quality and consistent, compatible drivers than the GeForce 6600GT. There were times when ATI and good drivers are two contradicting phrases, but with the Catalyst driver program, ATI seems to put most of their past issues to rest. As we've discovered, NVIDIA has some catching up to do. While they've more than succeeded in delivering good hardware in the form of GeForce 6600GT, their driver is not currently up to par with ATI's.

Overview

In the first part of this article, we recommend users to use Forceware 66.81 which is older instead of Forceware 77.72. It lacks the bugs affecting Splinter Cell and F1 Career Challenge plus it also offers overall faster performance than the 77.72. However, we did note that this may not always be an option for users. Newer PC games may have bugs or incompatibilities with Forceware 66.81 and the fixes are incorporated in Forceware 77.72. There might also be other bug fixes not related to graphics performance or new features. We don't think that this particular area was address properly in the first part. So, naturally we went back to testing, this time with three different games. Just like before, we perform this test both on the GeForce 6600GT with Forceware 66.81 and 77.72 and the Radeon X700 Pro with Catalyst 4.12 and 5.7.

Since we have more time to do these benchmarks, we were able to test various resolutions (1024 x 768, 1280 x 1024 or 960 and 1600 x 1200, 32 bit color), with and without AA / AF. We used three new, different games this time around: Brothers in Arms, Homeworld 2 and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. Testing are done by selecting a cut scene that's very close to gameplay situations or repeatedly playing the actual game in a similar manner. Unfortunately, looks like we discover yet another bug with Forceware 66.81. It will crash our system each time we press the Windows key (or use Alt-Tab) to switch to the Windows desktop game while playing the game Brothers in Arms. This bug made taking screenshots with Forceware 66.81 impossible, so we've decided to forgo image quality comparisons for Brothers in Arms. Fortunately, we we're still able to get screenshots with Homeworld 2 and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.

Brothers in Arms is a new game (released in 2005) from Gearbox and Ubisoft. It uses Epic's Unreal Engine and uses largely DirectX 8 shaders. In Brothers in Arms, we picked the intro chapter for testing. This intro chapter can be thought of as an interactive cinematic, it begins and ends with scripted scenes though in between you're able to move around just like you do in game. So, benchmark results do get a little varied, but surprisingly not much. This particular benchmark also scales well with resolution and AA / AF. We perform several benchmark runs and look closely at the results, usually there's only a maximum of 2 to 3 fps difference (from 20 or 30 fps) between runs. The results from repeated test are then used to compute an average.

The next game is quite an old game but a worthy successor to a classic Homeworld 2 from Relic Entertainment and Vivendi Universal. In Homeworld 2, we're using the cinematic in the first chapter, where they Vaygr bombers first appeared and is attacking the Chimera station. It features both close up and far away shots, including the Sensors Manager mode and should be quite a balanced view of general gameplay in Homeworld 2. Since it's a cinematic, the results are similar with very little differences (1 fps at most from 55 to 183 fps – not noticeable in real life).

Since we don't have a copy of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2 – Sith Lords, we're using the older game – the original SW: KOTOR. The graphics, effects and textures used are similar so you could expect the same level of performance on both games. Unlike Neverwinter Nights, SW: KOTOR uses DirectX 8 (partly due to its console heritage). We choose a cinematic sequence of a fight between a Jedi Knight and a Sith apprentice. They are fighting with lightsabers, with explosions (and smoke) in the background. This is the first Jedi vs Sith cinematic on the Endar Spire. This cinematic sequence also scales very well with resolution and AA / AF, considering this is an RPG that's quite rare. Variances are around 2 to 5 fps for 25 to 50 fps range.

Image Quality Comparison

The games we tested with:
Brothers in Arms
Homeworld 2
Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic

Our test setup
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ 'Newcastle' socket 939
2 x 256 MB Kingston KVR 3-3-3 PC3200 DDR-SDRAM
MSI K8N NForce 4 SLI motherboard
Maxtor DiamondMaxPlus9 80 GBs Serial ATA 8 MB buffer
ASUS E-616 DVD-ROM
450 watts ATX power supply

Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2 installed
ATI Catalyst 5.7 & 4.12 reference driver
NVIDIA Forceware 77.72 & 66.81 reference driver
NVIDIA NForce system driver version 6.66
Creative SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit integrated (motherboard supplied driver)
DirectX 9.0c

Below you can find screenshots we've taken for image comparison purposes. The left image is without AA and AF, while the right image (if any) are with AA and AF. You could click on the images to see the full image (1024 x 768, 32 bit). These full screenshots are quite big, so they may take a while to load.

Catalyst 5.7 and 4.12

Homeworld 2

Catalyst 4.12


Catalyst 5.7



Aside from the cursor and the interceptors in the distance, there are no differences between the two Catalyst. The same applies to AA and AF screenshots, although we apologize for not getting the same position for AA and AF screenshots, but the images are still very similar.

Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic

Catalyst 4.12


Catalyst 5.7



Catalyst 5.7 features more noticeable glow from the corridor lights (on both sides of the wall). This is apparent on both screenshots, both with and without AA and AF. There are no other differences between the two Catalyst.

Forceware 77.72 and 66.81

Homeworld 2

Forceware 66.81



Forceware 77.72



Aside from the cursor, there are no differences. The same also applies to AA and AF screenshots, again we apologize for not getting the exact same position.

Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic

Forceware 66.81



Forceware 77.72



The images from both Forceware versions are very much the same, both with and without AA and AF. There are no differences except for the armor, since the model is animated even when standing still. This does not influence performance.

Catalyst 5.7 and Forceware 66.81

We're using the screenshots taken with Catalyst 5.7 and then compare them to those taken with Forceware 66.81. Since both Forceware versions are basically the same, they can also represent image quality with Forceware 77.72. Except for the brighter glow in Catalyst 5.7 with SW: KOTOR, Catalyst 5.7 image quality is also the same with Catalyst 4.12.

Homeworld 2

Catalyst 5.7



Forceware 66.81



The entire screen is brighter with Forceware 66.81 and shadows are larger, though they have more aliasing and both looks a little bit off (the shadows don't 'touch' the object casting the shadows). Some lines on the menu are thicker in Catalyst. But all these differences are only noticeable in closeup shots. In the AA / AF screenshots, you could see there are still some aliasing in Forceware 66.81, so not all objects gets anti aliased. These become more apparent in motion.

Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic

Catalyst 5.7



Forceware 66.81



Catalyst 5.7 features more noticeable glow on the corridor lights, and with Forceware 66.81 the armor is brighter. These differences are also present with AA and AF enabled. You could also see a larger line separating the floor tiles in Forceware 66.81. The floor texture also looks a little sharper with Forceware 66.81, but the differences are not really noticeable unless you really look for it. Image quality wise, Forceware and Catalyst offer the same image quality, though with some differences in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, yet these differences does not imply lower image quality. However, this does not ring true for Homeworld 2. Both Forceware retains much of the aliasing when AA and AF is enabled and this means it offer lower image quality compared to both Catalyst when AA and AF are enabled.

Performance

The results:

Catalyst 4.12 and 5.7

We can see that performance in Brothers in Arms are practically identical between both drivers. The difference between can be attributed to the variance between runs (2 to 3 fps). Homeworld 2 performance is also very much the same, with and without AA and AF. In Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic we see some gains in various resolutions, but the most significant gains are with 1024 x 768, 32 bit, AA and AF (8 fps).

Forceware 66.81 and 77.72

Forceware 77.72 fixed a nasty bug with Brothers in Arms so it's not surprising performance is also better. The most significant gain is in 1024 x 768, 32 bit with 4x AA and 16x AF. Unfortunately, Homeworld 2 runs significantly slower with AA and AF if you're using Forceware 77.72. A performance drop also occurs in Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic with AA and AF enabled. So for these two games (and F1 Career Challenge, its best to scale down some detail or run without AA and AF for the time being.

Catalyst 5.7 and 66.81/77.72

Unlike the previous article, Image quality is relatively constant for both Forceware and Catalyst. The only exceptions are the light glow difference in SW: KOTOR that's present in Catalyst 5.7, but not really noticeable in gameplay.

So, how does thing fare for NVIDIA this time around? As we noted earlier, Forceware 66.81 will crash the whole system every time we want to switch to the Windows desktop in Brothers in Arms. This bug is fixed and no longer present in Forceware 77.72. In Brothers in Arms, the GeForce 6600GT is definitely the faster card, offering significantly faster frame rates for both minimum and average fps. So, not only did they fix the crash bug, but they also harvest some performance increase as well. In all, this is not surprising since this game is quite new.

Unfortunately, this increase and bug fix are apparently limited to newer games. In Homeworld 2, even with AA and AF, aliasing artifacts are still very much noticeable in motion with both Forceware versions. They become more obvious in motion. With Forceware 77.72, Homeworld 2 performance levels drops to levels below that of the Radeon X700 Pro when AA and AF are enabled. Considering they're not really very effective in removing aliasing, this is very disappointing indeed. Both Forceware versions runs slower with AA and AF at 1024 x 768, 32 bit in SW: KOTOR compared to Catalyst 5.7. It regains the lead at higher resolution (1280 x 960 and 1600 x 1200, 32 bit) with AA and AF, but trust me, you don't want to play at those resolutions: the average frame rates goes to 25 fps and below on both cards.

Conclusion:

So, it looks like we've proved our point yet once again. For newer games, users and gamers with the GeForce 6600GT must absolutely use the newer drivers. Newer drivers adds patches and bug fixes that makes them compatible with newer games. Not only do they (may) offer performance improvements, but what's more important is that they fix compatibilities with some games (even those that can cause system crashes). Unfortunately, the current official, final driver is still Forceware 77.72, with bugs that causes performance slow downs and graphical artifacts in some games. Most distressing is the fact that some of these bugs goes back to version 71.22 and there's still no fix for them.

Go to top