Published on 24th Jan 2006, written by Dave Baumann for Consumer Graphics - Last updated: 9th Jun 2008
Quake 4
Quake 4 takes the Doom 3 engine and advances it a little further. Doom 3's primary rendering principles still apply, though, with the unified lighting model playing a heavy role. Quake 4 does appear to have higher geometry levels than Doom 3, leaning on the geometry processing capabilities of a system a little more.
Quake 4
307200
480000
786432
1310720
1920000
X1900 XTX
40.4
62.2
103.3
160.8
215.8
X1900 XT
40.5
62.7
102.3
158.1
208.9
X1800 XT
40.1
62.6
98.9
144.7
183
X850 XT PE
36.6
58.4
81
102.6
120.6
X1900 XF
39.6
61.9
101.3
168.6
249.2
X1800 XF
39.6
61.9
101.1
168.2
241
pixels x fps - Mpixels per second
Quake 4 Performance Diff
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900 XTX to X1900 XT
-0.30%
-0.80%
1.0%
1.70%
3.30%
X1900 XTX to X1800 XT
0.80%
-0.60%
4.50%
11.10%
17.90%
X1900 XTX to X850 XT PE
10.40%
6.50%
27.60%
56.70%
79.0%
X1900 XF to X1800 XF
0.10%
0.0%
0.20%
0.20%
3.40%
Quake 4 Crossfire Increase
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900
-1.90%
-0.50%
-2.0%
4.80%
15.50%
X1800
-1.20%
-1.20%
2.30%
16.20%
31.70%
percentage
Despite Quake 4 using the Doom 3 engine, hence probably having a similar shader utilisation, the performance difference between the X1900 XTX and X1800 XT is actually a little greater at these settings than was the case for Doom 3, with the X1900 having an 18% performance advantage at 1600x1200. Despite this the performance are still quite CPU bound across this full range of resolutions here, hence the Crossfire gains are not that great without any extra IQ features enabled.
Quake 4 4xAA 8xAF
307200
480000
786432
1310720
1920000
X1900 XTX
40
60.2
95.1
134.6
165.7
X1900 XT
37
59.7
92.5
128.5
157.1
X1800 XT
39.4
57.5
86.4
114.8
138
X850 XT PE
33.1
41.8
55.7
70.1
81.4
X1900 XF
39.1
58.5
101.1
167.4
224.4
X1800 XF
39.5
55.7
101.4
163.6
215.2
pixels x fps - Mpixels per second
Quake 4 4xAA 8xAF Performance Diff
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900 XTX to X1900 XT
8.20%
1.0%
2.80%
4.80%
5.50%
X1900 XTX to X1800 XT
1.50%
4.80%
10.10%
17.20%
20.0%
X1900 XTX to X850 XT PE
21.0%
44.30%
70.80%
92.0%
103.50%
X1900 XF to X1800 XF
-0.90%
5.10%
-0.20%
2.30%
4.30%
Quake 4 4xAA 8xAF Crossfire Increase
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900
-2.20%
-2.90%
6.40%
24.30%
35.50%
X1800
0.20%
-3.10%
17.40%
42.50%
55.90%
percentage
With 4x FSAA and 8x AF enabled the performance gap actually opens out a little more between the X1900 and X1800 despite the higher demands FSAA and AF have on bandwidth and texturing, but thats likely due to the normal rendering case being CPU limited and constraining the potential difference in that situation.
Quake 4 6xAA 16xAF
307200
480000
786432
1310720
1920000
X1900 XTX
39.3
59.1
90.8
124
150.1
X1900 XT
39.5
57.6
87.8
118
142.7
X1800 XT
38.4
55.2
81.6
106.3
127.1
X850 XT PE
29.2
36.3
48.4
58.7
63.2
X1900 XF
39.6
56.8
101.4
165.5
228.5
X1800 XF
38.7
53.8
99.7
158.7
206.2
pixels x fps - Mpixels per second
Quake 4 6xAA 16xAF Performance Diff
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900 XTX to X1900 XT
-0.50%
2.70%
3.50%
5.10%
5.20%
X1900 XTX to X1800 XT
2.20%
7.10%
11.30%
16.60%
18.10%
X1900 XTX to X850 XT PE
34.50%
62.70%
87.80%
111.20%
137.70%
X1900 XF to X1800 XF
2.10%
5.50%
1.70%
4.30%
10.80%
Quake 4 6xAA 16xAF Crossfire Increase
640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
X1900
0.70%
-4.0%
11.60%
33.50%
52.20%
X1800
0.80%
-2.50%
22.20%
49.30%
62.20%
percentage
With 6x FSAA and 8x AF enabled the performance gap between the X1900 XTX and X1800 XT is about 18% at 1600x1200 and the average rendering performance of the XTX is well in excess of 60 FPS here. As the performances of the single boards are a little more graphics limited Crossfire shows gains over over 52% at 1600x1200 for the X1900, with both Crossfire platforms rendering above an average of 100 FPS at 1600x1200.