iXBT Labs - Computer Hardware in Detail

Platform

Video

Multimedia

Mobile

Other

Battle of
ATI RADEON X800 XT and NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
- Part Four:
RightMark3D-based Filtering Tests
Sapphire RADEON X800 Pro Review

June 7, 2004









CONTENTS

  1. Introduction
  2. Part 1: Features of R420/NV40 videocards
  3. Part 1: Configurations of testbeds, test tools
  4. Part 1: Quality: Bilinear filtering
  5. Part 1: Quality: Trilinear filtering
  6. Part 1: Quality: Anisotropic filtering
  7. Part 2: Sapphire Atlantis RADEON X800 Pro features
  8. Part 2: Performance
  9. Conclusions





Anisotropic filtering, 0°
ANIS 4x APP












ANIS 4x APP Colored












ANIS 8x APP












ANIS 8x APP Colored












ANIS 16x APP












ANIS 16x APP Colored












ANIS 16x P












ANIS 16x P Colored












ANIS 16x Q












ANIS 16x Q Colored












Anisotropic filtering, 30°
ANIS 4x APP












ANIS 8x APP












ANIS 16x APP












ANIS 16x P












ANIS 16x Q












Anisotropic filtering, 45°
ANIS 4x APP












ANIS 8x APP












ANIS 16x APP












ANIS 16x P












ANIS 16x Q













The situation with anisotropic filtering is more difficult. First, ATI plays an unpleasant trick when anisotropy is forced from drivers. Filtering is only based on bilinear samples, so, despite a clearly increased sharpness, borders between MIP levels are unpleasantly obvious. While NVIDIA smoothes these borders with partial trilinear filtering (see pictures with coloured levels), ATI shows clear borders in all modes including Quality. But when filtering degree is set from the application and not forced from the drivers, things get back to normal. So, what's the matter? Such problems have been repeatedly observed in game applications. If an application can't manage anisotropy itself, it can be forced from driver settings, and everything will be OK. If an application can do it, then we disable anisotropy in the drivers and activate it from the application. But if anisotropy is activated in both the drivers and the application, we get sharp borders between MIP levels, annihilating all visual quality of anisotropic filtering.

However, despite the fact that the problem has been repeatedly discussed illustrated with real games, ATI doesn't rush to eliminate it, shifting the responsibility to users and bad applications. But I think you will agree that it would be much more convenient to users if they could enable anisotropy support in the drivers once and for all, instead of guessing whether it's present or absent in the application. And when needed, they could duplicate it in the application without changing driver settings every time. Remember Unreal/Unreal Tournament and the games based on these engines: the application knows about anisotropic filtering but the latter is nowhere to be enabled in the settings. We can guess how ATI cards will act in these games, considering the user can only enable anistropy through the driver.

There are no general obstacles to it, and that's exactly the way it works in NVIDIA: you enable anisotropy and then you can forget about it. But ATI experts are either too lazy to adjust this option or too busy with optimisation selection at different stages in the driver. It is known that thorough anisotropic filtering is mainly needed for the base texture and others can normally do with simpler filtering. But in order to optimise performance basing on this fact, drivers need to know which texture is the base one, and it not always possible. Perhaps, undesirable visual artefacts are caused by too optimistic heuristics in ATI drivers. So, be careful with forcing anisotropic filtering in ATI driver settings, because if the application can activate anisotropy through API too, you're running the risk of getting problems with quality. (We repeat once again that everything will be OK if the application knows nothing about anisotropy.)

Alexey Barkovoy's note: It is the control panel that is to blame for this in the case of ATI. If you move the Performance/quality slider from the 3D tab to the right and thus select AF/AA forcing, trilinear anisotropic filtering will always be selected in the first texture, and bilinear anisotropic filtering in others. And after you "play" a bit with the slider (select "use custom settings" again and than AF separately), everything will work all right and trilinear filtering won't disappear at anisotropy forcing.

Now we'll try to arrange the contestants. 4x APP, 0°:

  • RADEON X800
  • RADEON 9800 and GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation

4x APP, 30°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • RADEON 9800 and GeForce 6800 with optimisation
  • RADEON X800

4x APP, 45°:

  • RADEON 9800
  • RADEON X800 and GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation

Interestingly, NVIDIA shows good results at 30° (and other values non divisible by 45°) while ATI prefers divisible values. X800 looks a bit worse than 9800 at 30 and 45°.

8x APP, 0°:

  • RADEON X800
  • RADEON 9800 and GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation

8x APP, 30°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation
  • RADEON 9800 and RADEON X800

8x APP, 45°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation, RADEON 9800 and RADEON X800
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation

The supposition that ATI dislikes complex angles (i.e. not divisible by 45°) which are important for uneven surfaces is confirmed.

16x APP, 0°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation and RADEON 9800
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation and RADEON X800

Here, filtering degree is sufficient even for our tricky example, and we can't name the leader. Visually, the modes are almost the same, therefore, we have to base on performance.

16x APP, 30°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation
  • RADEON 9800 and RADEON X800

16x APP, 45°:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation
  • RADEON 9800 and RADEON X800

NVIDIA shows some aliasing, but it is only typical of such tricky textures; in real applications, it will rather add clearness than do any harm. Anyway, it's all about identifying the LOD degree at which anisotropy gives maximal clearness without "going into dithering".

In the case of settings activated from drivers, NVIDIA shows a better quality everywhere, due to the above-mentioned way ATI drivers act:

  • GeForce 6800 without optimisation
  • GeForce 6800 with optimisation
  • RADEON 9800 and RADEON X800

ATI has to work on this aspect, as the problem lies in the driver heuristics and is not related to hardware.

Filtering conclusions

There are only two noteworthy facts besides the mentioned problem with anisotropy forcedly installed in the applications that control it themselves. First, there are many cases where X800 shows a somewhat worse picture than RADEON 9800. Second, NVIDIA exceeds ATI at complex angles while ATI competes successfully with NVIDIA at simple ones, especially at 0° (walls, floor, ceiling) which is widely spread in classical FPSs. On the other hand, flight simulators and landscape games with complex reliefs will have a quality advantage on NVIDIA. Later on, we'll check these suppositions in game applications.

And now we're moving to Part Two that deals with the new Sapphire videocard based on a powerful X800 Pro.



[ Previous part (2) ]

[ Next part (4) ]



Andrey Vorobiev (anvakams@ixbt.com)
Alexander Medvedev (unclesam@ixbt.com)

07.05.2004


Write a comment below. No registration needed!


Article navigation:



blog comments powered by Disqus

  Most Popular Reviews More    RSS  

AMD Phenom II X4 955, Phenom II X4 960T, Phenom II X6 1075T, and Intel Pentium G2120, Core i3-3220, Core i5-3330 Processors

Comparing old, cheap solutions from AMD with new, budget offerings from Intel.
February 1, 2013 · Processor Roundups

Inno3D GeForce GTX 670 iChill, Inno3D GeForce GTX 660 Ti Graphics Cards

A couple of mid-range adapters with original cooling systems.
January 30, 2013 · Video cards: NVIDIA GPUs

Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1

An external X-Fi solution in tests.
September 9, 2008 · Sound Cards

AMD FX-8350 Processor

The first worthwhile Piledriver CPU.
September 11, 2012 · Processors: AMD

Consumed Power, Energy Consumption: Ivy Bridge vs. Sandy Bridge

Trying out the new method.
September 18, 2012 · Processors: Intel
  Latest Reviews More    RSS  

i3DSpeed, September 2013

Retested all graphics cards with the new drivers.
Oct 18, 2013 · 3Digests

i3DSpeed, August 2013

Added new benchmarks: BioShock Infinite and Metro: Last Light.
Sep 06, 2013 · 3Digests

i3DSpeed, July 2013

Added the test results of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 and AMD Radeon HD 7730.
Aug 05, 2013 · 3Digests

Gainward GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST 2GB Golden Sample Graphics Card

An excellent hybrid of GeForce GTX 650 Ti and GeForce GTX 660.
Jun 24, 2013 · Video cards: NVIDIA GPUs

i3DSpeed, May 2013

Added the test results of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770/780.
Jun 03, 2013 · 3Digests
  Latest News More    RSS  

Platform  ·  Video  ·  Multimedia  ·  Mobile  ·  Other  ||  About us & Privacy policy  ·  Twitter  ·  Facebook


Copyright © Byrds Research & Publishing, Ltd., 1997–2011. All rights reserved.