Good work nVidia! Apparently Tom's Hardware used the new reference drivers from nVidia. Surprisingly, they were able to squeeze out another ~5% out of the GF3 and GF4 cards. Well, ATI's next official drivers (the 6058, which is currently unofficially release) also squeezes out 5% and in some cases 10% out of the R8500 more over the 6043 drivers. In any case, nVidia and ATI seem to now be playing the driver game. Hmm, I wonder... Is it just me or has nVidia released this driver to take the lead in the sub-$200 section with Ti4200? In any case, I'm not complaining. Round Google: Winner: nVidia.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
I was just wodnering where the Ati 7200 fits into this group of cards, I thought it was equivalent to one of the cards that are up there but I am not sure, I lost track when Ati renamed their line of cards.
Damn, I just read the article, and it looks like honestly ati got owned, by the ti500, LET ALONE, the gf4.
The benchmarks where the radeon8500 won, (with the exception of 3dmark2001) they won BARELY, but in the benchmarks where the 8500 lost, they lost big time.(the first one comes to mind).
The gf4 just smokes the radeon.
This cements my feeling that the gf3 ti500 is a better overall performer than the 8500, and that the gf4 is just sweeeeet.
This cements my feeling that the gf3 ti500 is a better overall performer than the 8500, and that the gf4 is just sweeeeet.
Hmm, it depends on the two drivers you compare, but I say they're neck and neck. The Ti500 is slightly faster with the new drivers but we haven't seen the OpenGL games where the R8500 truly shines with the 6043 drivers. Most of the improvements in the 6043 were focused on OpenGL performance not DirectX. The 6058 improves DirectX slightly. ATI is always two official driver revisions behind leaks.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Hmm, it depends on the two drivers you compare, but I say they're neck and neck. The Ti500 is slightly faster with the new drivers but we haven't seen the OpenGL games where the R8500 truly shines with the 6043 drivers. Most of the improvements in the 6043 were focused on OpenGL performance not DirectX. The 6058 improves DirectX slightly. ATI is always two official driver revisions behind leaks.
You really cant compare leaked drivers to official ones IMO, but regardless, the open gl games the radeon won BARELY.(did anyone else think it was weird the origional gf3 beat the gf3 ti500 in jediknight 2? There is NO reason why that should happen, ever)
The direct x games the radeon got owned, and direct x is a large part of modern games, so you have a radeon which can keep up in ogl and gets punked in d3d, dosent make me want to go and buy it personally.
As you can see, ATI lost to the Ti500 in Aquanox and Max Payne but won in Q3, Jedi Knight II and 3dMark2001. I'd hardly say that the Ti500 owns the R8500. Besides, Jedi Knight II and Q3 were the only OpenGl games they tested. That's an incomplete comparison if you ask me.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
As you can see, ATI lost to the Ti500 in Aquanox and Max Payne but won in Q3, Jedi Knight II and 3dMark2001. I'd hardly say that the Ti500 owns the R8500. Besides, Jedi Knight II and Q3 were the only OpenGl games they tested. That's an incomplete comparison if you ask me.
Maybe incomplete, but lets analyze those figures shall we.
the radeon lost to the gf3 ti 500 in aquanox by ~10%
The radeon lost to the gf3 ti 500 in max payne by ~10-20%
The radeon beat the gf3 ti 500 in quake 3 by ~3-4%
The radeon beat the gf3 ti 500 in jedi knight by <1%
The radeon beat the gf3 ti 500 in 3dmark2001(pointless) by ~5%
as you can see, when the 8500 wins, it is by far less than when it loses, which shows me the ti500 is a stronger overall player, you can debate all you want, but as far as this review is concerned the writing is on the wall man.
Any reason why they didn't include the Radeon 8500 128MB card in the benchmarks? (Not the LE edition) From what I've heard it has a higher clock speed and should perform a little better than both the 8500 64MB and the 8500LE 128MB. Just curious.
as you can see, when the 8500 wins, it is by far less than when it loses, which shows me the ti500 is a stronger overall player, you can debate all you want, but as far as this review is concerned the writing is on the wall man.
I don't have to debate, the 6043 drivers hardly touch the DX core. I want some OpenGL tests. How about RTCW, SS:SE, etc?
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Any reason why they didn't include the Radeon 8500 128MB card in the benchmarks? (Not the LE edition) From what I've heard it has a higher clock speed and should perform a little better than both the 8500 64MB and the 8500LE 128MB. Just curious
because were comparing 64megs of memory to 64 megs of memory for starters.
don't have to debate, the 6043 drivers hardly touch the DX core. I want some OpenGL tests. How about RTCW, SS:SE, etc?
What good is a videocard which in its best environment can just match the gf3 but gets its ass handed to it in d3d?
Even if the 8500 came out ~5% ahead of the gf3 in ogl, it would still lose overall due to the 10-20% loss in d3d, both systems are used extensivly, its not like there are no d3d games and you can just ignore d3d as if it didnt exist.
I'm guessing that JKII makes better use of the 128MB of memory available in some of the cards (it was a GF3 Ti200 with 128MB). It looks like all of the 128MB cards get a boost in JKII.
The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark 