Parhelia got owned by Xabre 600!

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
I notice my following example has many flaws in them but o well it's an idea...

heh. i noticed the problem with the theoretical estimation.

edit: oh yea. i guess the est. sort of reflects on how well the core was built.

[P5ycho]

Originally posted by Kruzin
What good does it do to calculate "theoretical" possibilities, when the card can't do it?
Even if P got 5 FPS, it would be 5 more than the others can dream of doing.

Just look at what you've just posted, you'd rather play a game at an obviously unplayable framerate just because your can do it and no other card can... well i'd switch to a healthy 60+ fps on a singlehead card anyday if that were my case!

[WyWyWyWy]

SOmething is wrong there.
Even GF4mx is faster than 9500?!

[Pace]

Originally posted by Kruzin
What good does it do to calculate "theoretical" possibilities, when the card can't do it?
Even if P got 5 FPS, it would be 5 more than the others can dream of doing.

5fps would be completely unplayable though. So, none of those cards would be any good for SurroundGaming.

An average of 23fps is pretty much unplayable as well - does anyone play RTCW at playable frame rates and, if so, what settings?

Bit by bit the Radeons get more and more tempting...

[GNEP]

Actually, anyone fancy double checking that score with their P and RTCW? I would, but don't have RTCW...

[KeiFront]

Here we go, thread has been moved to the benchmark section so lets benchmark :

AMD XP 1800@2000, SDRAM, Parhelia A128R (not oc)
Latest Parhelia driver: 1.3.0.43.
All settings at highest.

Checkpoint
1600x1200 32Bit without FAA
average of 3 benchmark runs: 52.1 FPS

1600x1200 32Bit with FAA
average of 3 benchmark runs: 34.5 FPS

Surround gaming
3072x768 32bit without FAA
average of 3 benchmark runs: 49.1 FPS

3072x768 32bit with FAA
average of 3 benchmark runs: 34.4 FPS

[K6-III]

Based on your results, looks like the review was very flawed...

[KeiFront]

Probably, depends on which drivers version they used. Or maybe game settings.

mikeul, what's the source of your picture. So we can see which driver revision they used.

[Novdid]

I have a R9700Pro and play the game at 1600x1200x32, some form of FSAA and Aniso. Never bothered to bench it, if it just hovers around 50 I'm happy (but I get more than that). That's in single player. In multi player I'm more into speed and back down to 1024x768 4xAA and 16xAniso. Some times I'm tempted to run the game (or any other game for that matter) with 6xAA just because it just looks so gorgeous.

[KeiFront]

I found the source of the picture and I'm currently rebenching.

[borat]

i think you will find that surround gaming does not actually hinder the card as much as you think as when running the 2 side screens thaey are not usually subject to intense action but merely displayin surroundings so the graphics card is not so highly stressed, also i dont know how much they put on the card but things like the physics of the game also remain constant, i certainly can play smoother in ut2003 at 3072x768 than at 1600x1200, aniso and faa of course

[KeiFront]

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/index.html You can download the config they used.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein (MultiPlayer) (id Software/Activision) - OpenGL, multitexturing, Checkpoint-demo, best test settings, S3TC OFF, configs are here

Still getting a lot more than their score though:
1600x1200 32 bit
2945 frames, 80.2 seconds: 36.7 fps with FAA
2945 frames, 52.8 seconds: 55.8 fps without FAA

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/0103/itogi-video-q3std-w2k-ath1600.html

[K6-III]

Figured as much. Digitlife always buchers the Parhelia's performance. Wonder why....

[borat]

hmm and crank up the anti aliasing on the xabre and radeons and what do we get?parhelia bashing is not really deserved, i mean its perfectly playable with faa at high resolutions even in games which the drivers suck with.

[borat]

how about this graph with shite drivers too:

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/0103/itogi-video-ut2003-w2k-aaa-ath1024.html