| Benchmarks
The heart
of any review is usually the benchmarks...just what
kind of performance can a given piece of hardware be
expected to attain. In the case of the Erazor X2, the
results are impressive. The test rig was as follows:
Elsa
Erazor X2 (with 5.13 reference drivers)
Pentium 3-600E
256MB Crucial PC133 memory
Abit BF6 motherboard
Maxtor 15GB (7200RPM)
Windows 98 SE
For this
part of the review, the processor and video were run
at default speeds. I chose the 5.13 reference drivers
because they offer the best perfromance (though there
a few graphical anomalies) and should be officially
available shortly.
3D
Mark 2000
Though
it is a synthetic benchmark, it is quite easy to test
the Direct3D capabilities of a video card with 3D Mark
2000 from MadOnion. Benchmark was run in "Default"
mode. The test results are shown below.
3D Mark
|
CPU Mark
|
Game 1
Low Detail
|
Game 1
High Detail
|
4492
|
376
|
98.9 fps
|
35.8 fps
|
Quake
3
To test
the OpenGL capabilities of the Erazor X2, Quake 3 was
used. The first set of marks are with quality settings
at "high" (32-bit colordepth/32-bit textures
and trilinear filtering enabled). The 16-bit settings
were based on the "fastest" option.
| Color Depth |
640x480
|
800x600
|
1024x768
|
1152x864
|
1280x1024 |
1600x1200 |
| 32-bit |
89 fps
|
83 fps
|
63 fps
|
47 fps
|
35 fps |
22 fps |
| 16-bit |
96 fps |
95 fps |
92 fps |
88 fps |
76 fps |
55 fps |
You can
see in the 16-bit settings, that at lower resolutions,
the CPU was the limiting factor and thus there was no
change in framerate between 640 and 800. I tested the
1024x768 "high" settings in an intense 11
player game and gameplay was as smooth as silk. No reason
to turn down any options with this card. For the full
benchmarks results including additional OpenGL testing,
please visit the GeForce Driver Comparison.
|
