Image quality observations
Image quality is a contentious issue right about now. Certain people will pore over screengrabs to try and identify miniscule differences in image quality between ATI and NVIDIA's drivers. We've taken a few screenshots between a Radeon 9600XT and the Leadtek FX 5700. We'll let you make up your minds as to how each driver fares. Firstly, UT2003 in coloured mipmap mode. Apologies for not getting both shots identical positions. However, the shot should show the differences anyway. Click to enlarge for 1024x768 shots.The Leadtek WinFast A360TD's shots on the top, the ASUS Radeon 9600XT/TVD on the bottom of each section.
ATI certainly has a better transition when looking through the shots. The detail at the very end is almost identical. It's a lot more difficult to see the mipmap change in the game, especially when you're on the ragged edge.
Subjectively, a little better on the 9600XT with coloured mipmapping within Serious Sam 2. Nothing major in it, and nothing that we would be concerned with.
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2004 was run with 4x AA and 8x AF here. We can't really tell a difference, can you ?
Image quality difference appear to be game specific. The tested 52.16 set is considerably better than some of NVIDIA's drivers of late. It entirely depends upon your personal stance on the position of 3D I.Q. If you positively demand the highest quality, NVIDIA may still just be a notch below ATI. Personally, we're not too concerned with the official 52.16 Detonators.
