• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Doom 3 benchmarks are here!

D

DSN2K

Member
http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQy

1090364971VEVx7HppJJ_3_1.gif

1090364971VEVx7HppJJ_4_1.gif


new Nvidia cards are really pulling away.
 
I

Izzy

Banned
Well, what did you expect? NVIDIA's GF6800U is capable of 32 zixels per clock, which is quite handy for games with a lot of stencil FX, like Doom 3.
 
A

Andy787

Banned
Holy crap. I've been reading a lot of articles that seem to point at the X800 (both XT and even Pro) are quite a bit more powerful than the Ultra, but this news makes me extremely happy, because I'm probably going to pick up one of HP's new gaming PC's, and the only cards they have are Nvidia's.
 
T

TekunoRobby

Tag of Excellence
The way ATI has their X800 XT distribution setup I'll be getting an 6800 Ultra whether I want too or not.

This is the closest gap between the cards:
1090364971VEVx7HppJJ_3_3_l.gif
 
I

Izzy

Banned
Andy787 said:
Holy crap. I've been reading a lot of articles that seem to point at the X800 (both XT and even Pro) are quite a bit more powerful than the Ultra, but this news makes me extremely happy, because I'm probably going to pick up one of HP's new gaming PC's, and the only cards they have are Nvidia's.
Click to expand...


For games with a lot of stencil shadowing, and SM 3.0 games, Ultra or GT are the only choice. Shame about the dual molex, though.
 
G

goodcow

Member
As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience.

:eek
 
P

pestul

Member
Yeah, we knew this was coming.. Doom 3 is an OpenGL game, and Nvidia has always dominated in that. Wait until we see the HL2 benchmarks.. they'll probably be the exact opposite of this (and since more future games are likely to be D3D..).
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
I was thinking those numbers were disappointing...until I saw the resolution and AF settings. -_-;

I'll be happy with 1024x768 with no AA or AF.
 
I

Izzy

Banned
That said, it looks as if ATI's decision to scale their current line of flagship video cards by crippling the Radeon X800Pro’s graphics pipelines to 12 pipes, instead of the 16 pipes of the Radeon X800XT-PE might have been a bad move, at least in terms of satisfying DOOM 3 players. NVIDIA on the other hand chose to scale from their Ultra to GT models by only decreasing the clock speed of the GPUs. The NVIDIA 6800GT certainly stood out among the crowd as its DOOM 3 framerates continually outpaced the Radeon X800XT-PE that currently has a list price that is $100 more than the GeForce 6800GT. NVIDIA has told us more than once that the 6800 series was “designed to play DOOM 3,” and the truth of that statement is now glaringly obvious.
Click to expand...


http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQyLDU=
 
open_mouth_

open_mouth_

insert_foot_
what kind of FPS can I expect to get using a 9800Pro/P4 2.66/1 Gig @ 1024x768 High Qlty??

50FPS + would be fine by me.
 
T

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
Not suprised.

I expect Half Life 2 will preform about as much better for Ati than Nvidia, just like it did 1 year ago.
 
C

Chopin Trusty Balls

First casualty in the war on idioticy.
I bet ATI will release new drivers before Doom 3 even ships,btw wasnt there some Custom OpenGL Radeon drivers that were supposed to be better then ATIs?
 
E

Error Macro

Member
ATI knows that is has to get drivers out the door so that it's flagship model beats nVidia's best. I guarantee that they probably have an entire team dedicated to improving the Doom 3 benchmark scores right now.
 
D

Deg

Banned
Fleming said:
I bet ATI will release new drivers before Doom 3 even ships,btw wasnt there some Custom OpenGL Radeon drivers that were supposed to be better then ATIs?
Click to expand...

There are unnofficial drivers
 
E

epmode

Member
pestul said:
Wait until we see the HL2 benchmarks.. they'll probably be the exact opposite of this (and since more future games are likely to be D3D..).
Click to expand...
truth. considering that i expect more half-life 2 mods than doom 3, i'm not feeling too bad about my x800 xt preorder.

/damage control =D
 
M

Mrbob

Member
Doom_Bringer said:
Radeon 9800 Pro benchmarks?
Click to expand...

Look at the 9800XT numbers. 9800PRO should clock in close. Overclock your card to XT speeds and you are set.

X800 gets stomped.
 
T

Traumahound

Member
goodcow said:
As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience.

:eek
Click to expand...

I thought Doom 3 required a card with pixel shaders? Even if it doesn't require one, it must look awful on that card.
 
M

Mrbob

Member
Traumahound said:
I thought Doom 3 required a card with pixel shaders? Even if it doesn't require one, it must look awful on that card.
Click to expand...

Yes this is the problem. It can't do all the special effects newer cards can accomplish.
 
T

The Shadow

Member
epmode said:
/damage control =D
Click to expand...

LOL

I wouldn't feel so bad about getting an ATI. People go batty because one game makes one card maker look good but no doubt there's another game and another set of benchmarks that'll show the exact opposite, Half-Life 2 already mentioned a few times.

This generation the performance from both nVidia and ATI is much closer than before. It's not so easy to declare a clear and distinct winner based on just one game.

goodcow said:
As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience.

:eek
Click to expand...

The lack of pixel shaders is likely why it's "surprising". Without all those texel effects, the card doesn't have to do as much as more modern pixel shading cards.
 
R

ravingloon

Member
FriScho said:
I want some 9800Pro Benchmarks with a 2.8-3 Ghz P4
Click to expand...

I want some benchmarks at 1024 and no AA or AF (neither of which I use unless the game is really old).

P.S. Those 1st benchmarks are some real horseshit: A 3.6 GHZ P4 with 4GB of DDR2 RAM.

Edit: Jesus Christ. Even the second batch is using 2GB RAM. I'm glad I recently upgraded to 1GB. Because that propaganda about 512 being enough and not really needing more sure don't seem applicable in these official benchmarks. Actually that's the lowest they benchmark anything at: 2GB.
 
M

Mrbob

Member
Yeah, the benchmark hardware is weird. Especially for HARDOCP who prides themselves on gameplay benches and not timedemo benches. They sold out for Doom 3. :p

4gb ram system come on get real guys.
 
C

Chony

Member
Oni Jazar said:
This is great and all but how about a benchmark for the REST OF US?

9500 Pro anyone?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would really like to see this (though a non pro 9500 soft modded and overclocked).
 
E

Error Macro

Member
Oni Jazar said:
This is great and all but how about a benchmark for the REST OF US?

9500 Pro anyone?
Click to expand...

Same here, I've got a 9500 Pro and would like to see how bad (or good, depending) the game performs on it.
 
A

AntoneM

Member
Izzy said:
For games with a lot of stencil shadowing, and SM 3.0 games, Ultra or GT are the only choice. Shame about the dual molex, though.
Click to expand...

it's even more of a shame no one bothered to read this:
6800's true wattage

and the 6800 GT only has one molex. That said Doom 3 is OpenGL and NV has always been a stong performer in OpenGL.
 
S

Slo

Member
I'm content with my 9800 Pro, but it sure looks like nVidia got things back on track this round.
 
T

Tenguman

Member
All I ask is for Doom3's framerate to be more consistant than Far Cry's.

Seriously, Far Cry has the shittiest frame-rate inconsistancies I've ever seen

In one instance, I'll be moving along at 50fps, and then I come across some random hut and for no real reason, the framerate drops into the 20's.

I wished they benched a 6800np so I can get an idea what I'll be running at


But I agree, those specs are WAY out of porportion as to what MOST people will have. I want to see specs on a 2.0->2.8ghz machines with 512-1024mb of RAM

REAL WORLD mid-range is a 2.0ghz machine w/ a 9600pro at 512mb of ram

not a 3.2ghz w/ 2gb of RAM!
 
S

Shompola

Banned
ravingloon said:
I want some benchmarks at 1024 and no AA or AF (neither of which I use unless the game is really old).

P.S. Those 1st benchmarks are some real horseshit: A 3.6 GHZ P4 with 4GB of DDR2 RAM.

Edit: Jesus Christ. Even the second batch is using 2GB RAM. I'm glad I recently upgraded to 1GB. Because that propaganda about 512 being enough and not really needing more sure don't seem applicable in these official benchmarks. Actually that's the lowest they benchmark anything at: 2GB.
Click to expand...

Maybe they are using 2gig of ram to be on the safe side when benching these cards.
 
T

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
I'm not even sure Windows handles 2 GB - 4 GB effectively anyway. It actually might slow down your system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The FF14 Dawntrail Benchmark is Out!
13
3K
JMZ555 replied
DOOM: The Dark Ages Will Have More Enemies, Larger Arenas, and Slower Action
News Platform 2 3
146
7K
Balducci30 replied
Once and for all, is it OK to buy AMD for a mid-high range gaming PC?
2
83
3K
killatopak replied
Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 and 3: Adreno GPU rumoured to launch with DLSS Frame Generation-like feature
11
1K
Bernoulli replied
Nvidia has a new graphics Control panel
Analysis 2 3
130
12K
winjer replied
Top Bottom