Simviation Forum - VGA Chart from Uncle Tom

Oct 15^th, 2004 at 2:22pm

congo Offline
Colonel
Make BIOS your Friend
Australia

Gender:
Posts: 3663

I don't know if anyone has posted this, but Tom's have used FS2004 in a VGA comparison chart recently.

Thanks Tom Wink

Note how Poorly the TI4200 does in this test, even though a good card, it suffers dramatically under the stresses of 4x AA and 8x AF.

I used to run my TI4200 at 2x AA and 2x AF or no AF and it ran quite well, comparing with a 9600XT.

Other interesting observations, the differences between the 9800pro and 9800XT, and the 5900ultra and 5900XT considering that in each of those pairs, one is half the price of the other ! Wink

Mainboard: Asus P5K-Premium, CPU=Intel E6850 @ x8x450fsb 3.6ghz, RAM: 4gb PC8500 Team Dark, Video: NV8800GT, HDD: 2x1Tb Samsung F3 RAID-0 + 1Tb F3, PSU: Antec 550 Basiq, OS: Win7x64, Display: 24" WS LCD

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 6:04am

Politically Incorrect Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender:
Posts: 3915

Thanks Congo it is nice to see a benchmark set up for FS9 only.
You know how bad I critize them mainly becasue they are shown for other games. But looking at this one it shows numbers that correspond with what many say they can achive.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 6:53am

Delta_ Offline
Colonel
Woah!
London, UK

Gender:
Posts: 2032

I use the 9600xt, and max the settings except for the clouds, those are down a couple of notchs. I run temporal anti-aliasing, it is an amazing method of AA, it looks like 6xAA, and only hits FPS like it is 4xAA. I also use 16XAF in high quality mode.

I suspect if FS9 was DX9 graphics a lot of cards would drop off that list, including the FX5200, as that claims to be DX9 accelerated, but is not powerful enough to cope so it is disabled by the drivers.

Good benchmark congo! Wink

My system:Intel Q6600@3.6GHz, Corsair XMS2 4GB DDR2-6400 (4-4-4-12-1T) , Sapphire 7850 OC 2BG 920/5000, X-Fi Fatality, Corsair AX 750, 7 Pro x64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 10:54am

Iroquois Offline
Colonel
Happy Halloween
Ontario Canada

Gender:
Posts: 3244

Very interesting. They forgot to test the 6600s. Looks like my original list was pretty accurate. Looks like nVidia is king this time around. I'm surprised the FX5200 beat the Radeon 9600SE. What's the difference between that and a regular 9600?

I only pretend to know what I'm talking about. Heck, that's what lawyers, car mechanics, and IT professionals do everyday. Wink

&&The Rig: &&AMD Athlon XP2000+ Palomino, ECS K7S5A 3.1, 1GB PC2700 DDR, Geforce FX5200 128mb, SB Live Platinum, 16xDVD, 16x10x40x CDRW, 40/60gb 7200rpm HDD, 325w Power, Windows XP Home SP1, Directx 9.0c with 66.81 Beta gfx drivers

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 3:11pm

JBaymore Offline
Global Moderator
Under the curse of the
hombuilt cockpit!

Gender:
Posts: 10261

congo,

Do you happen to know what the internal SIM settings were for the test and what the core machine was (processor clock, fsb, ram etc)?

My 9800XT doesn't give me NEAR those kind of framerates in that scenario. If I had that I'd be happy as a pig in "hog lubricant".

best,

.................john

Intel i7 960 quad 3.2G LGA 1366, Asus P6X58D Premium, 750W Corsair, 6 gig 1600 DDR3, Spinpoint 1TB 7200 HD, Caviar 500G 7200 HD, GTX275 1280M, Logitec Z640, Win7 Pro 64b, CH Products yoke, pedals + throttle quad, simpit

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 3:45pm

4_Series_Scania Offline
Colonel
He who laughs last, thinks
slowest.
Stoke on Trent England U.K.

Gender:
Posts: 3638

This list seems to confirm the FX6800 (Non GT) as the best pound / performance by a mile!

I can't wait for mine!

Posting drivel here since Jan 31st, 2002. - That long!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Oct 16^th, 2004 at 8:14pm

JBaymore Offline
Global Moderator
Under the curse of the
hombuilt cockpit!

Gender:
Posts: 10261

I just upgraded to the cat 4.9's from my old cat 4.7 drivers for my ATI 9800XT........

I gained 603 points in 3Dmark01 SE !!!!!!!! Grin

First time that has happened with an ATI driver update for me. Usually they go down Tongue

.

I continue to have the problem of good framerates up and away from anything....as evidenced by this shot below in Nepal .... which probably gained about 5-7 fps from the cat 4.9's...............but in urban centers with lots of AI trafficv and building secenery around I still get in the low teens:

best,

...................john

« Last Edit: Oct 16^th, 2004 at 9:42pm by JBaymore »

Intel i7 960 quad 3.2G LGA 1366, Asus P6X58D Premium, 750W Corsair, 6 gig 1600 DDR3, Spinpoint 1TB 7200 HD, Caviar 500G 7200 HD, GTX275 1280M, Logitec Z640, Win7 Pro 64b, CH Products yoke, pedals + throttle quad, simpit

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Oct 17^th, 2004 at 8:30am

Delta_ Offline
Colonel
Woah!
London, UK

Gender:
Posts: 2032

9600 and 9600se have the same speeds, but 9600 has 128-bit bandwidth and the 9600se has 64-bit bandwidth, so the 9600se has half the performance of the 9600.

My system:Intel Q6600@3.6GHz, Corsair XMS2 4GB DDR2-6400 (4-4-4-12-1T) , Sapphire 7850 OC 2BG 920/5000, X-Fi Fatality, Corsair AX 750, 7 Pro x64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Oct 17^th, 2004 at 12:01pm

congo Offline
Colonel
Make BIOS your Friend
Australia

Gender:
Posts: 3663

The testbed was a 3.2ghz P4 on a I875 chipset (800mhz fsb) with 1gb ram.

The Game quality settings were quoted as "Standard Quality Settings" (what ever that is) with unlimited framerate and trilinear filtering.

Here is a link to one of the pages.

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/vga_charts-03.html

Just a thought, but maybe someone could "Sticky" the VGA Chart, as video card issues are one of the main concerns here, and also the most confusing?

???

Mainboard: Asus P5K-Premium, CPU=Intel E6850 @ x8x450fsb 3.6ghz, RAM: 4gb PC8500 Team Dark, Video: NV8800GT, HDD: 2x1Tb Samsung F3 RAID-0 + 1Tb F3, PSU: Antec 550 Basiq, OS: Win7x64, Display: 24" WS LCD

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: