|
We know from previous reviews that 3DMark is a system wide test stressing all the major system components like memory controller and bandwidth, CPU speed and video card capabilities and performance. It also scales nicely on the GeForce4 making it a nice test here. Lets see how the Visiontek does up against the Ti4400 with an identical memory size configuration.
Clock speed is all that differentiates the two cards here. With 250/445 versus the 275/550 on the MSI Ti4400, the Visiontek can't expect to live with it's bigger brethren but with performance just shy of 10,000 out of the box, we can't complain. NV25 is strong in 3DMark 2001 and that reputation doesn't dwindle with this showing. Strong shader hardware and decent memory bandwidth are the keys to the performance here. Onto Aquamark.
Aquamark, as we know, relies heavily on competent shader hardware on the GPU to perform well. Ti4200 does well here since it shares the same GPU as Ti4400. It outperforms R8500 and GeForce3 Ti500 quite easily here so lets see how it stacks up against Ti4400.
Proportionally the same difference in performance as 3DMark 2001 above so we know things are working properly. The lower clocks are all that account for the drop in performance versus Ti4400 and it's to be expected. The drop in memory bandwidth and slower shader hardware due to the drop in GPU clock are the reasons for the performance defecit.
But again, the performance is strong just Ti4400 is stronger. It would be marginally quicker than R8500 here I estimate although not by much, a frame or two ahead.
So far, strong performance as we expect, just behind the higher clocked Ti4400. On to Quake 3 and Serious Sam 2 before a look at Comanche 4.
|
