Fall 2003 Video Card Roundup Part I - ATI's Radeon 9800 XT
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on October 1, 2003 3:02 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
We’ll limit the talk about the new batch of $500 cards to the first few lines of this conclusion. The Radeon 9800 XT offers a marginal performance improvement over the regular Radeon 9800 Pro, definitely not worth upgrading to for current 9800 Pro owners.
As far as people looking to upgrade once for the long run, with new architectures due out in 6 months, a $500 investment today would be significantly more out of date than if you purchase a card right before a refresh. We rarely recommend that you buy the fastest performing card on the market; in fact the last time we did that was with the Radeon 9700 Pro – the impact of which is clearly not equaled by the Radeon 9800 XT (nor were we expecting it to). Whether spending $500 is worth it today is your call, but you can definitely get very similar performance out of a used Radeon 9700 Pro or even a non-Pro Radeon 9800 at much better price points. If money is no object, then we’re sure that ATI wouldn’t mind shipping a few more XTs in your direction.
We’re quite wary of recommending any of the current NVIDIA cards at this point, for two major reasons. First, with NV38 coming right around the corner any FX 5900 Ultra purchases wouldn’t be wise investments. Also, given the marginal performance improvements you can expect out of a 5% core clock increase, don’t have incredibly high expectations for the NV38. We can’t recommend the GeForce FX 5600 Ultra because NVIDIA has already indicated that NV36 (the 5600 Ultra’s successor) will be here shortly to replace it and should offer significantly greater performance. So if you’re looking to buy a video card right now, ATI is the way to go.
Looking at the stats, ATI clearly wins in 6 games, NVIDIA wins in 4 games and the two come very close in 5 games. Games such as Command & Conquer Generals: Ground Zero and Simcity 4: Rush Hour are examples where ATI clearly has the lead over NVIDIA and the argument could be made that ATI holds the lead because they optimize for all games, while NVIDIA just optimizes for benchmark titles. However, looking at games like Homeworld 2 and Neverwinter Nights you could make the exact opposite argument.
What’s clear is that both manufacturers optimize for the more popular games and the focus of optimizations is obviously greater on more visible games. With that said, we’re hoping that by expanding our test suite we will be able to encourage optimizations to make more games run better. We’ll see how the picture we’ve depicted here today changes as time goes on.
Although we did provide some insight into the “next generation” of games with scores from Halo, the real question on everyone’s mind is still Half Life 2 as well as Doom3. The performance crown under Doom3 is still in NVIDIA’s camp apparently, and although the latest drivers have closed the gap significantly, ATI is still ahead in Half Life 2. The numbers we’ve seen indicate that in most tests ATI only holds single digit percentage leads (< 5%), although in some cases ATI manages to pull ahead by double digits.
There’s much more to come, but for now we’ve given you quite a bit to chew on…
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
263 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I would like to see you guys useStarwars Galaxies: An Empire divided
I'm not sure if there's a benchmark for this game but i think you can come up with something...
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
#69 I agree that those areas should have been explored further, perhaps not in situations where frames were dropping very low but indeed you make a good pointAnonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Great work, however in the relentless march forward the benchmarks lack the cards to compare the previous generation.For instance I own a Nvidia Ti4600. I'd potentially want to buy something new but to make a decision I want to see how my card performs against the newer cards shown.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I have just came here from [H]ardOCP to read this article and I noticed something so glaringly obvious im surprised no one has mentioned it.How many of you play games at 1024X768, I know I dont, I play em at 1280X1024 or higher and where has Nvidias biggest drawback been lately, yes thats right you increase the screen size and Nvidia jumps of a cliff whereas ATI walks down a step.
I been a gamer who doesnt use 1024X768 means this review is of no use to me, the drivers used are questionable, the image quality is inferior, the setup is poor, and the results DO NOT compare to other sites (ive checked 4 sites so far not including NV38 part), also after looking over this site I have seen not one advertisement for ATI yet I have seen a few concerning Nvidia.
Anandtech from what I remember used to be impartial this something I dont think they are anymore.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
which bench's did that occur #65? im too lazy to go sorting thru em ;)if that is the case, then that has dodgy drivers written all over it
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I'm most interested in hearing about MMORPG performance. I know you included Final Fantasy XI in this suite, but I was hoping that you select an established, popular game. MMORPG DX9 titles like Starwars Galaxies or Asheron's Call 2. And MMORPG DX8 titles like Dark Age of Camelot or Anarchy Online. These games represent more closely were MMORPGs are headed in graphics engine development. Upcoming titles like, like Middle-Earth Online (Turbine), D&D Online (Turbine), Everquest 2 (Sony Entertainment), and Mythica (Microsoft).Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
hey i'm interested in the benchmark from simcity4.i find it akward that since i have a radeon 9800PRO in my rig running a athlon 2600+ with 1gb of ram, i usually get 15fps with the updated patches from EA for simcity4. I've been searching around the internet about this problem of why simcity 4 just plain sucks with radeon cards and everyone on the forums says that its EA's fault for the way how they programed it. Anyways, why is it that Anand's benchmark of his radeons are all the way up to 52fps when most of his system setup is close to my specs?....anand? what drivers and patches are you using?
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
How do some cards (mostly nVidia, most evident on the 5600 Ultra) speed up in some benchmarks when AA and AF were turned on? Doesn't that raise a flag immediately?Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
I know that this is all about the newer technology, but it would have been nice if you would have thrown a couple of the older cards in for comparisions sake (and for those without the cash to purchase new cards every 6 months) like the Geforce 4 TI 4600 or 4200 and the Radeon 8500.Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 - link
Any news as to why HL 2 benchmark was not out on 30.09 as it was supposed to?