Here is our third installment of \u201cBig GPU-Shootout\u201d<\/em>.\u00a0 Part I<\/a> covered Cat 8.8 vs. Geforce 177.41 on Intel’s P35 MB platform as we examined the performance of five video cards.\u00a0 The new cards we tested were: HD4870-512MB, HD4870X2-2GB,\u00a0 GTX280; while 8800GTX & 2900XT represented the top and mid-range cards of the last generation.\u00a0 The resolutions we test at for these reviews at are fairly demanding for any PC – 1920 x 1200 and 1680 x 1050.\u00a0 We used a combination of\u00a0 ten benchmarks, including PC games\u2019 built-in performance benchmarks and custom time demos as well as synthetic tests, and we came to some interesting conclusions.\u00a0 We realized that last generation’s video cards are not sufficient for today’s Vista DX10 maxed-out gaming at 1920×1200 and even 1650×1080 with 4xAA\/16xAF.\u00a0 We realized that a modern gamer wanting to play the latest DX10 PC games needs to upgrade to this generation of video cards.\u00a0\u00a0 Our CPU for the first article of our series compared e4300 at it its overclock of 3.33Ghz with e8600 at its stock 3.33 GHz and found the older CPU lacking in comparison.\u00a0 We continued for the rest of our series with our e8600 which we later overclock to nearly 4.0 Ghz for the next 3 reviews, and we always use the DX10 pathway in Vista 32, whenever possible, for this entire series. We also started to bench with crossfireX-3 in Part I which ran on fairly immature drivers and we will continue to chart its progress.<\/p>\n Part II<\/a> – Cat 8.9\u00a0 vs. Geforce 178.13 was also tested on our P35 motherboard (PCIE 1.0\/Crossfire 16x+4x) and demonstrated to us the need for overclocking our e8600 CPU from stock 3.33 Ghz to nearly 4.0 Ghz to take full advantage of our new video cards.\u00a0 We also set new benchmarks with these drivers that we are continuing to use to compare two different motherboard platform’s performance into Part III, this article.\u00a0 For Part II, we added a couple of more games and refined our testing slightly.\u00a0 We also noted that the ranking of the new video cards has remained the same: 4870X2, GTX280 and 4870 while crossfireX-3 got more mature drivers over the last Catalyst 8.8 set.<\/p>\n Part III, for this review – PCIe 1.0 vs. PCIe 2.0<\/em> – we are also using Cat 8.9 vs. Geforce 178.13 as in the last review, Part II in our series.\u00a0 However, this time, we are particularly comparing individual video card and crossfireX-3 performance with our new x48 motherboard’s double-the-bandwidth<\/em> 2.0 PCIe vs. our old P35 motherboard’s PCI express (PCIe) 1.0 specification.\u00a0\u00a0 We also look at the potential performance increase in upgrading from P35 motherboard’s PCIe 1.0 bandwidth – doubling to X48 motherboard’s PCIe 2.0 specification with our top 3 video cards: HD4870, GTX280 and HD4870X2.\u00a0 We will also note the possible benefits of Intel’s X48 motherboard’s full X16 + X16 crossfire slots over P35 motherboard’s X16 + X4 crossfire slots.<\/p>\n This time, there are a lot of comparisons to be made between these two motherboard platforms as we look for possible reasons a PC gamer would upgrade his motherboard platform – or not.\u00a0 AMD\u2019s crossfire or Nvidia’s SLi technology is a solid way to transform an ordinary gaming machine into a gamer’s powerhouse.\u00a0 However, with several Intel-based platforms supporting crossfire across different PCI express lane configurations, there are several options that concern many gamers about whether or not their motherboard can provide enough bandwidth to realize the full potential of crossfire – or even a single fast GPU like GTX280.\u00a0 So we are going to take the two extremes<\/em> – P35 motherboard’s PCIe 1.0 and crossfire 16x + 4x PCIe vs. X48’s PCIe 2.0 and 16x +16x crossfire slots and examine their performance differences.<\/p>\n Since Intel’s Core 2 chipset development has been halted in favor of Core i7, it is now a good time to analyze how crossfire scales on these two motherboard chipsets as a guide for those looking to possibly upgrade to the best performance so as to get the best bang for the buck. <\/em>We are assuming that the owners of P35-based motherboard high-end systems, probably should have purchased Intel\u2019s fastest Core 2 Duo processor and four gigabytes of high-speed memory so as to still have a decent gaming PC. In this review, we will attempt to determine if P35 motherboards are suitable for crossfire, SLi or single slot 4870, 4870-X2 or GTX280 upgrades.<\/p>\n P35 Express<\/strong><\/p>\n Intel released its P35 Express chipset in mid-2007 and brought with it support for FSB-1333 processors and DDR3 SDRAM, though Intel left support of DDR2 memory intact.\u00a0 It’s spec is PCIe 1.0 or 1.1 and we chose a Gigabyte P35 DS3P motherboard which features PCIe 1.0 and crossfire PCI express lanes of 16x+4x and DDR2.<\/p>\n X48 Express<\/strong><\/p>\n X48 and X38 chipsets are basically the same with the only real difference between the two chipsets is that Intel approved<\/em> X48 for 1,600 MHz FSB speeds; both the X48 and X38 have built-in support for FSB 1600. The main features that Intel released in its X38\/X48 chipsets were aimed at high-end graphics. First was full support for AMD\u2019s crossfire by adding sixteen more lanes for full x16 transfer mode to both cards instead of splitting them into 16x+4x as in P35 Motherboards or even splitting them in half as in the later motherboard chipset P45’s 8x+8x Crossfire lanes. In addition to the added pathways, PCI express 2.0 transfer rates doubled peak slot bandwidth.\u00a0 We purchased a DDR2-supporting, X48-based ASUS P5E Deluxe for our tests to more directly compare with our older Gigabyte’s DDR-2 P35 DS3P MB.\u00a0 Overclocked to nearly 4.0 Ghz for both of our platforms, our Core 2 Duo E8600 required good RAM to achieve its optimum performance. Unfortunately, our older P35 chipset couldn’t use the DDR2-1000 setting without instability.\u00a0 We settled for identical RAM speeds and latencies at DDR2-800 speeds for both motherboards to compare performance identically.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Let\u2019s begin with Part III<\/em> round of testing. We are still using Catalyst 8-9 and Geforce 177.83 as in our last article. Only final certified drivers are used for our regular testing consistently all through these these reviews up-until-now and also all through our entire series. Identical 250 GB hard drives are set up with the latest version of Vista 32-SP1; each with identical programs, updates and patches – the only differences are the video cards and the motherboards.\u00a0 The testing hardware is detailed in the following chart:<\/p>\n Test Configuration<\/span><\/strong><\/span> * Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 (reference 3.33 GHz, Overclocked to 3.99Ghz ). Test Configuration \u2013 Software<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n * ATi Catalyst 8.9, highest quality mip-mapping set in the driver; Catalyst AI set to \u201cadvanced\u201d * as noted, vsync off in the driver to \u201capplication decide\u201d and never in game. <\/p>\n 3DMark06<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n 3DMark06 still remains the number one utility used for a system benchmark. The numbers it produces aren\u2019t indicative of real-world gameplay – or any gameplay in general – and for that reason we really dislike using it to compare different systems. However, as long as the rest of the tech world uses it to evaluate gaming performance, we will too. We find it mostly useful for tracking changes in a single system, what we are mostly doing now. There are four \u201cmini-games\u201d that it uses for benchmarking graphics, as well as two CPU tests. The scores are \u201cweighed\u201d and added together to give an overall number and there is a further breakdown possible with these mini games that we are charting for you.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Trouble Below! - Canyon Flight<\/p><\/div>\n Above is a scene from one of the four benchmark \u201cmini games\u201d used to benchmark GPU performance.\u00a0 It will give your PC a real workout even though the default resolution is only 12\u00d710 (as pictured).\u00a0 Here are the results of our 3DMark06 benchmark comparison using the benchmark at its default settings:<\/p>\n 3DMARK06<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Unlike with Part I and II of our series, we have a small surprise.\u00a0 We can see the ranking and we note the maturity of both sets of vendor’s drivers are good.\u00a0 HD4870X2 scales well although crossfireX-3 still barely scales in this combination of drivers and HW in this synthetic benchmark.\u00a0 However, the thing to note is the comparison of the our motherboard’s performance.\u00a0 First of all, there is little difference with 4870 -512MB in either the 1.0 PCIe board or in the PCIe 2.0 mother board.\u00a0 However, we do see GTX280 making a significant jump from 15073 to 16045 by simply upgrading to PCIE 2.0!\u00a0 There is almost no difference in 4870×2 or crossfire-X3 performance with either MB and it could possibly be attributed to drivers.\u00a0 We also note the 4870-1GB scores a bit higher than its 512MB VRAM sister card.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n The 3DMark06 mini-games more specifically compare the video cards performance.\u00a0 We note that it is more significant than the final 3DMark overall score might suggest. Here we also note that 4870-X3 outperforms 4870-X2 in every test and generally there is a small performance increase going from the limited bandwidth of PCIe 1.0 to 2.0.\u00a0 Again, there is little difference in this benchmark with the 4870×2’s 2GB VRAM paired with the crossfired second card being either 512MB instead of 1.0GB or being limited to x4 PCIe instead of x16.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Vantage<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Now we move on to Vantage, Futuremark\u2019s latest test.\u00a0 Of course, we feel the same way about Vantage as we do about 3DMark06 – it is really useful for tracking changes in a single<\/em> system.\u00a0 However, it has become a new de facto standard for measuring PC video gaming performance and we will use it also.\u00a0 There are two mini-game tests: Jane Nash<\/em> and Calico<\/em>.\u00a0 Also there are two CPU tests but we are focusing on the graphics performance<\/p>\n Below are two scenes from Vantage, both shown at 1920\u00d71200 resolution and with every setting fully maxed out.<\/p>\n Jane Nash<\/p><\/div>\n Calico<\/p><\/div>\n For our benchmarking results below, we used the default tests.<\/p>\n Vantage results:<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Again we see the 4870, 4870X2 and GTX280 ranking unchanged but the 2.0 specification’s superiority over the 1.0 spec is not seen in the overall score except with GTX280 and crossfire-X3.\u00a0 Strangely, the 512MB card as the second card instead of our 1GB 4870, appears to make no difference.\u00a0 We also see the GTX280 has a rather high GPU score compared to the others and we also noted this in Cat 8-10 testing.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Fur Benchmark<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Fur Benchmark v1.2 is Open Gl and a synthetic benchmark.\u00a0 We picked 1920\u00d71200 resolution and 4xMSAA.<\/p>\n a rotating fur donut bench<\/p><\/div>\n Fur OpenGL benchmark<\/strong><\/p>\n Here our 280GTX takes off, unfettered by the P35 motherboard’s limited PCIe bandwidth.\u00a0 4870X2 and 4870-X3 have a solid but perhaps less dramatic improvement while 4870-512MB makes no difference in either motherboard.\u00a0 We also note the 512MB version is outperformed by the 4870-1GB version in this test.\u00a0 Enough of the synthetics – on to PC games!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Call of Juarez<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n God Rays<\/p><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Call of Juarez<\/em> is the first ever DX10 benchmark from Techland that was released in June 2007 as a fast-paced Wild West Epic Adventure Shooter. Call of Juarez<\/em> is loosely based on Spaghetti Westerns that become popular in the early 1970s.\u00a0\u00a0 Call of Juarez features it\u2019s Chrome Engine using Shader Model 4 with DirectX 10, so the usage of Vista is mandatory. This benchmark isn\u2019t built into Call of Juarez<\/em> but is a stand-alone that runs a simple fly-through of a level that\u2019s built to showcase the game\u2019s new DX10 effects. It offers great repeatability and is a good stress test for DX10 features in today\u2019s graphics cards although it is not quite the same as actual gameplay as the game logic and AI are stripped out of the demo. Still it is very useful in comparing video cards performance.<\/p>\n Performing Call of Juarez<\/em> benchmark is easy as you are presented with a simple menu to choose resolution, anti-aliasing, and two choices of shadow quality options. We set the shadow quality on \u201chigh\u201d and the shadow map resolution to its maximum, 2048\u00d72048. At the end, the demo presents you with the minimum frame rate, maximum frame rate, and average frame rate, along with the option to quit or run the benchmark again. We always ran the benchmark at least a second time and recorded that generally higher score.<\/p>\n Call of Juarez<\/em> DX10 benchmarks<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/strong> Interesting.\u00a0 280GTX shows mixed results on our motherboards.\u00a0 It shows more gain at the lower of the two resolutions we chose.\u00a0 Again, 4870-512MB shows little difference in either motherboard with the edge going to the X48.\u00a0 This time, the 512MB 4870 beats the 1GB version, consistently! 4870-X2 gains +7 FPS in the maximum frame rate at 1920×1200 while crossfireX-3 gains about +5 FPS with the PCIe 2.0 MB over the P35 1.0 spec. It is doubtful it makes a practical playable difference in the minimum frame rates, as we see 4870X2 only picking up a few tenths of a frame at 1920×1200, but crossfireX-3 gains more than +3 FPS – from 40>43.4.\u00a0 For 16×10 resolution, perhaps there is more reason to upgrade you P35 MB as we do see a bit more performance using X48 motherboard; but not for crossfireX-3 with 1.0 GB VRAM\u00a0 over 512 MB as the 2nd card in Call of Juarez<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n CRYSIS<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Crysis DX10<\/p><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Now we move on to Crysis<\/em>.\u00a0 It is the most demanding game released to date for any PC. Crysis<\/em> is a sci-fi first person shooter by Crytek and published by Electronic Arts, November, 2007.\u00a0 Crysis<\/em> is based in a fictional near-future where an ancient alien spacecraft is discovered buried on an island near the coast of Korea. The single-player campaign has you assume the role of USA Delta Force, \u2018Nomad\u2019 in the game.\u00a0 He is armed with various futuristic weapons and equipment, including a \u201cNano Suit\u201d which enables the player to perform extraordinary feats.\u00a0 Crysis<\/em> uses DirectX10 for graphics rendering.<\/p>\n A standalone but related game, Crysis Warhead<\/em> was released in September, 2008. It is notable for providing a similar graphical experience to Crysis<\/em>, but with less graphical demands on the PC at its highest ‘enthusiast’ settings. CryEngine2 is the game engine used to power Crysis<\/em> and Warhead<\/em> and is an extended version of the CryEngine that powers FarCry<\/em>.\u00a0 As well as supporting Shader Model 2.0, 3.0, and DirectX10\u2019s 4.0, CryEngine2 is multi-threaded to take advantage of SMP aware systems. Crysis<\/em> also comes in 32-bit and 64-bit versions and Crytek has developed their own proprietary physics system, called CryPhysics. There are three built-in demos that are very reliable in comparing video card performance. However, it is noted that actually playing the game is a bit slower than the demo implies.<\/p>\n G<\/strong>PU Demo, Island<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n All of our settings are set to ‘maximum’ but we do NOT apply any AA\/AF in the game.\u00a0 Here is Crysis\u2019 Island Demo <\/em>benchmarks, at 1920\u00d71200 resolution, then 1680\u00d71050:<\/p>\n Not much difference for GTX280 at 1920×1200, but a little improvement is noted at 1680×1050 with our X48 motherboard over P35.\u00a0 4870-512MB appears to have very little difference in either motherboard and the 1GB version is faster at all settings.\u00a0 This time, 4870-X2 picks up solid performance in the PCIe 2.0 slot – 19FPS at the minimium at 1920×1200, goes up to the almost playable 25 FPS!\u00a0 CrossfireX-3 also gets some smaller performance gains in our newer motherboard; again, the amount of gain is still probably held back by driver immaturity.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Quake Wars: Enemy Territory<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Enemy Territory, Salvage Demo<\/p><\/div>\n Quake Wars: Enemy Territory<\/em> is an objective-driven, class-based first person shooter based in the Quake universe. It was developed by id Software and Splash Damage for Windows and published by Activision.\u00a0 Quake Wars<\/em> pits the combined human armies of the Global Defense Force (GDF) against the technologically superior Strogg, an alien race who has come to earth to use humans for spare parts and food.\u00a0 It allows you to play a part – probably best as an online multi-player experience – in the desperate battles waged around the world in mankind\u2019s desperate war to survive.\u00a0 Quake Wars<\/em> has controllable vehicles and aircraft as well as multiple AI deployables, asymmetric teams, big maps and the option of computer-controlled \u2018bots. Online and offline play modes are available as PC versions let you play individual campaigns against bots and allows the player combat as both sides. The Human weapons and vehicles are mostly based on modern combat weapons and vehicles but updated for the 50 years into the future. The Strogg have alien weapons and vehicles.<\/p>\n Quake Wars<\/em> is an OpenGL game based on id\u2019s Doom3 game engine with the addition of their MegaTexture technology.\u00a0\u00a0 It also supports some of the very latest 3D effects seen in today\u2019s latest DX10 games, including soft particles.\u00a0 id\u2019s MegaTexture technology is designed to provide very large maps without having to reuse the same textures over and over again.\u00a0 For our benchmark we chose the flyby, Salvage Demo<\/em>, from Quake Wars: Enemy Territory<\/em>.\u00a0 It is one of the most graphically demanding of all the flybys and is very repeatable and reliable in its results. It is fairly close to what you will experience in-game.\u00a0 All of our settings are set to ‘maximum’ and we also apply 4xAA\/16xAF in game.<\/p>\n Salvage Demo<\/em> fly-by:<\/strong><\/p>\n Our GTX280 liked our X48MB better than P35.\u00a0 Except for a single maximum frame rate at 1920x12oo, all the other tests showed gains in the newer motherboard.<\/span> 4870 got rather mixed results and the 1GB version is generally edging out the 512MB version.\u00a0 4870-X2 strangely preferred the P35 MB, but not crossfireX-3 which had much better performance on X48.\u00a0 This time crossfireX-3 with a 512MB version in the second slot was beaten badly when it was compared to “true” CrossfireX-3 [4870×2-2GB + 4870-1GB] – 56 FPS as a minimum at 1920×1200 to 83 FPS !!<\/p>\n Consider this a warning to those who use “FrankenfireX-3” – 512MB is a limiting factor when it happens.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n F<\/strong>.E.A.R.<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Note the soft shadows<\/p><\/div>\n F.E.A.R. – First Encounter Armed Assault<\/em> – is a DX9c game by Monolith Productions that was originally released in October 2005 by Vivendi Universal Production. Later, there were two expansions with the latest, Perseus Mandate<\/em>, released in 2007. Although the game engine is aging a bit, it still has some of the most spectacular effects of any game, showcasing a powerful particle system, complete with showers of sparks, puffs of smoke and dust for collisions with objects and walls as well as including bullet marks on walls and other visual effects including \u201csoft shadows\u201d. This is well highlighted by the the built-in performance test although it was never updated.\u00a0 This performance test will tell you how F.E.A.R.<\/em> and its first expansion Extraction Point<\/em> will run, but Perseus Mandate<\/em> is more demanding on your PC graphics and will run slower than the demo.\u00a0 We always run at least 2 sets of tests with all in-games features at \u2018maximum\u2019 – one featuring \u201csoft shadows\u201d and the other with 4xAA instead, as they do not run well together.\u00a0 F.E.A.R.<\/em> uses the Jupiter Extended Technology engine from Touchdown Entertainment.<\/p>\n All settings are set to ‘maximum’ as we first we test at 1920\u00d71200 with no AA but with Soft shadows enabled and then with 4xAA, no soft shadows:<\/p>\n Finally we test at 1650×1080 with no AA but with Soft shadows enabled and then with 4xAA, no soft shadows:<\/p>\n We see GTX280 taking advantage of the PCIe 2.0 specification, but no one playing on a P35 motherboard would notice any practical difference.\u00a0 Ditto for 4870 and 4870 but we see far more mixed results.\u00a0 CrossfireX-3 generally gets more performance out of X48 and in most of the F.E.A.R.<\/em> benches it is an advantage to have a 1GB card in the second slot – especially<\/em> with 4xAA applied.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Half-Life2: Lost Coast<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Lost Coast Playable Tech Demo<\/p><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Half-Life2<\/em> is still a popular game and is the oldest game we review for this series. Half-Life2: Lost Coast<\/em> is an additional level for this 2004 game. Lost Coast<\/em> was released October, 2005 as a free download to all purchasers of Half-Life2. Lost Coast<\/em> was developed as a playable tech demo, intended to showcase the newly-added high definition range lighting – HDR – features of the Source Engine. Lost Coast<\/em> features some very minor storyline details that were scrapped from Half-Life2<\/em>. A flyby of this level is played during the HL2<\/em> video stress test and it is very repeatable and quite accurate.\u00a0 All in-game settings are fully maxed out, including 4xAA\/16xAF.<\/p>\n This old Source engine barely benefits from a newer platform and each of our modern GPUs easily hit the frame rate cap.\u00a0 Still, we generally see some improvement in all of our video card configrations in favor of upgrading to X48 – but not for Half-Life2<\/em>.<\/p>\n [The top 1920×1200 resolution chart is mislabeled – the last two GPUs, 4870-X2 (1.0) and 4870-X2 (2.0) should instead be labeled CFX3-512M and CFX3-1G respectively.]<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Lost Planet DX10 benchmark<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Snow benchmark<\/p><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Lost Planet: Extreme Condition<\/em> is a Capcom port of an Xbox 360 game which became the first DX10 game.\u00a0 It takes place on the icy planet of E.D.N. III which is filled with monsters, pirates, big guns, and huge bosses.\u00a0 This frigid world makes a great environment to highlight the benefits of high dynamic range lighting (HDR) as the snow-white environment reflects blinding sunlight, while DX10 particle systems toss snow and ice all around.\u00a0 The game looks great in both DirectX 9 and 10 and there isn\u2019t really much of a difference between the two versions except perhaps shadows. Unfortunately, the DX10 version doesn\u2019t look that much better when you\u2019re actually playing the game and the DX10 version still runs slower than the DX9 version.<\/p>\n There are two versions of this benchmark. One was released as a stand-alone demo and the other is in-game. We chose the in-game demo from the retail copy of Lost Planet<\/em> released on June 26, 2007 and updated through Steam to the latest version for our benchmark runs. This run isn\u2019t completely scripted as the bugs spawn and act a little differently each time you run the demo. The benchmark is more of a scripted flyby of the level with \u201cnoclip\u201d turned on.\u00a0 This means the benchmark won\u2019t make an absolutely perfect comparison between different hardware setups, even with identical game settings. So we ran it many times. Lost Planet\u2019s Snow<\/em> and Cave<\/em> demos are run continuously in-game and blend into each other.\u00a0 All settings are fully maxed out with 4xAA and 16AF applied.<\/p>\n Here are our benchmark results with Snow and Cave.\u00a0 All settings are fully maxed out in game including AA\/AF – first at 1920\u00d71200 resolution:<\/p>\n Lost Planet Benchmarks<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n And Now at 16×10:<\/p>\n Lost Planet shows a huge performance increase for GTX280 when it is unfettered by PCI express 1.0 bandwidth constraints; in some cases from barely playable to solidly playable when it is on a X48 motherboard.\u00a0 4870-X2 and even 4870 has a nice increase on a X48 motherboard over P35.\u00a0\u00a0 CrossfireX-3 also gets a nice boost from PCIe 2.0 but this time there isn’t a lot of performance difference between 16x+4x and 16x+16x PCIe lanes; probably future drivers will show it.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Unreal Tournament3<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
\n
\n Test Configuration – Hardware<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n
\n * Gigabyte P35-DS3P (Intel P35 chipset, latest BIOS. PCIe 1.0 specification; crossfire 16x+4x).
\n * ASUS P5e-Deluxe (Intel X48 chipset, latest BIOS. PCIe 2.0 specification; crossfire 16x+16x).
\n * 4 GB DDR2-PC8500 RAM (2×2 GB, dual-channel at PC6400 speeds).
\n * Nvidia GeForce GTX280 (1 GB, nVidia reference clocks) by BFGTech
\n * ATi Radeon 4870 (512 MB, reference clocks) by Sapphire
\n * ATi Radeon 4870 (1GB, reference clocks) by ASUS
\n * ATi Radeon 4870X2 (2 GB, reference clocks) by VisionTek
\n * Onboard RealTek audio
\n * 2 – Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Hard Drives [setup identically, except for the graphics cards]\n
\n * nVidia Geforce 178.13, high quality driver setting, all optimizations off, LOD clamp enabled.
\n * Windows Vista 32-bit SP31; very latest updates
\n * DirectX August 2008.
\n * All games patched to their latest versions.<\/p>\n
\n Test Configuration \u2013 Settings<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n
\n * 4xAA only enabled in-game; all settings at maximum 16xAF applied in game [or in CP except as noted; No AA\/AF for Crysis<\/em> and No AA for UT3<\/em>]\n * All results show average, minimum and maximum frame rates
\n * Highest quality sound (stereo) used in all games.
\n * Vista32, all DX10 titles were run under DX10 render paths<\/p>\n![\"Trouble](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmark06-2008-12-13-08-04-53-80.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"3dmark06-2008-12-13-08-04-53-80\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"3dmark-06_basic1\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmark-06_basic1.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"3dmark-06_basic1\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"3dmark-06_games\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmark-06_games.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"3dmark-06_games\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Jane](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmarkvantage-2008-12-13-08-11-31-75.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"3dmarkvantage-2008-12-13-08-11-31-75\\"")
<\/a>![\"Calico\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmarkvantage-2008-12-13-08-16-15-06.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"3dmarkvantage-2008-12-13-08-16-15-06\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"3dmark-vantage_basic1\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmark-vantage_basic1.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"3dmark-vantage_basic1\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"3dmark-vantage_games\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/3dmark-vantage_games.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"3dmark-vantage_games\\"")
<\/a>
\n <\/em><\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"a](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/furmark-2008-12-20-09-31-40-03.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"furmark-2008-12-20-09-31-40-03\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"furmark_1920\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/furmark_1920.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"furmark_1920\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"God](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/coj_dx10-2008-12-13-08-20-10-41.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"coj_dx10-2008-12-13-08-20-10-41\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"coj_19203\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/coj_19203.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"coj_19203\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"coj_16802\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/coj_16802.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"coj_16802\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Crysis](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/crysis-2008-10-24-15-11-16-84.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"crysis-2008-10-24-15-11-16-84\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n![\"crysis_1920\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/crysis_1920.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"crysis_1920\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"crysis_1680\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/crysis_1680.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"crysis_1680\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Enemy](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/etqw-2008-12-20-20-46-24-88.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"etqw-2008-12-20-20-46-24-88\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"qw_1920\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/qw_1920.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"qw_1920\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"qw_1680\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/qw_1680.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"qw_1680\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Note](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/fearxp2-2008-12-20-19-54-33-88.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"fearxp2-2008-12-20-19-54-33-88\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n![\"fear_1920_noaa2\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/fear_1920_noaa2.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"fear_1920_noaa2\\"")
<\/a>![\"fear_1920_4xaa\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/fear_1920_4xaa.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"fear_1920_4xaa\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"fear_1680_noaa2\"](\"http:\/\/i2.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/fear_1680_noaa2.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"fear_1680_noaa2\\"")
<\/a>![\"fear_1680_4xaa\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/fear_1680_4xaa.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"fear_1680_4xaa\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Lost](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/hl2-2008-12-20-20-27-21-78.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"hl2-2008-12-20-20-27-21-78\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n![\"hl2-lc_19203\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/hl2-lc_19203.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"hl2-lc_19203\\"")
<\/a>![\"hl2-lc_16802\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/hl2-lc_16802.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"hl2-lc_16802\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Snow](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/lostplanetdx10-2008-12-20-20-30-00-31.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"lostplanetdx10-2008-12-20-20-30-00-31\\"")
<\/a>
<\/p>\n
\n <\/em><\/p>\n![\"lp_snow_1920\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/lp_snow_1920.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"lp_snow_1920\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"lp_cave_1920\"](\"http:\/\/i1.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/lp_cave_1920.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"lp_cave_1920\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"lp_snow_1680\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/lp_snow_1680.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"lp_snow_1680\\"")
<\/a>![\"lp_cave_1680\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/lp_cave_1680.jpg?resize=547%2C397\" "\\"lp_cave_1680\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n
![\"ut3-2008-12-20-20-49-35-84\"](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/ut3-2008-12-20-20-49-35-84.jpg?resize=150%2C150\" "\\"ut3-2008-12-20-20-49-35-84\\"")
<\/a>![](\"http:\/\/i0.wp.com\/alienbabeltech.com\/main\/wp-content\/uploads\/2008\/12\/ut3_19202.jpg\"){kind=link}