Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Tech Report play with insane resolutions

  1. #1
    HEXUS webmaster Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    14,283
    Thanks
    293
    Thanked
    841 times in 476 posts

    Tech Report play with insane resolutions

    Imagine being asked by your readers to grab some 7800 GTX SLI benchmarks at 2048x1536. Sounds fair, given just how fast a pair of the little beggars can be. Still, when it requires you to purchase a new monitor, you know you're either dedicated, or slightly mad.

    Luckily, the results of TR's tests lead to more than just a few charts and results. The 7800 GTX seemed to have an exceptional performance advantage over its other high-end brethren. Suspiciously so, in fact. In their quest for answers, TR discovered from ATi and then nVidia that the greatest reason for the performance differential is the size of the Hierarchical Z buffer. HiZ speeds up rendering by ignoring polygons that won't be displayed on screen. However, at uber-high resolutions, the entire frame won't fit into the HiZ buffer, so part of the frame will lack HiZ optimization... unless you're running a 7800 GTX.
    At the end of the day, performance at 2048x1536 isn't really a good indicator of relative rendering power or likely performance in future games, but it is a very interesting special case. For what it's worth, it seems to me that the Radeon X850 XT PE scales up a little more gracefully than the GeForce 6800 Ultra most of the time, although neither card handles uber-res modes as well as the 7800 GTX. The GeForce 6800 Ultra SLI rig, in particular, suffers mightily at three megapixels, so that you're almost better off with a single 7800 GTX.
    An interesting read for the polygon heads out there, but don't all go rushing to buy 22" monitors at once - somebody will do their back in.
    PHP Code:
    $s = new signature();
    $s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display(); 

  2. #2
    Rys
    Rys is offline
    Tiled
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Abbots Langley
    Posts
    1,479
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 1 post
    Great stuff from Damage. I'm remiss at not being able to write something similar, but my best monitor stops at 1600x1200. Hurray for LCDs, but boo at being too poor to get myself a Dell 2405
    MOLLY AND POPPY!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,041
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    8 times in 8 posts
    • oralpain's system
      • Motherboard:
      • DFI "Blood Iron" P35-T2RL
      • CPU:
      • Intel Pentium E2140 @ 400x8 (3.2GHz), 1.375v
      • Memory:
      • Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 CL4 @ 500MHz (DDR 1000), 4-4-4-12-T2, 2.3v
      • Storage:
      • 2x Seagate ST3250410AS
      • Graphics card(s):
      • NVIDIA 8800GTS (G92) 512 @ 783MHz core, 1836MHz shader, 1053Mhz memory, stock cooling 70% fan speed
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic SS-500GB
      • Case:
      • Antec P182, with some small modifications
      • Monitor(s):
      • ASUS VW222U
      • Internet:
      • Time Warner "Road Runner" Cable - 16 megabit downstream, 1 megabit upstream
    I've had monitors capable of doing 2048x1536 for 4 years and several older games are playable at such resolutions, so this is nothing new to me really.

    Now, if I could get a good refresh rate at such resolutions, I'd really be itching for a 7800GTX.

  4. #4
    Now with added sobriety Rave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SE London
    Posts
    9,948
    Thanks
    501
    Thanked
    399 times in 255 posts
    Yeah, but to display a 2048x1536 picture properly a CRT with a visible screen area of 21" (which I guess most 22" screens are) would need to have a dot pitch of less than .21mm. Do they exist?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23-03-2005, 10:52 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-03-2005, 09:24 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2005, 05:24 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28-02-2005, 11:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •