Benchmarks - Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness (DirectX)
Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness is currently still one of the few titles to utilise much DirectX9 functionality in the game. Here we'll be using our own internal benchmark demo.
| TR:AoD (FPS) | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| X800 XT PE | 132.9 | 129.8 | 118.4 | 97.5 | 71.3 |
| X800 PRO | 130.6 | 124.0 | 99.2 | 80.1 | 56.0 |
| 9800 XT | 126.4 | 107.2 | 76.4 | 55.6 | 37.2 |
| 9800 PRO | 123.9 | 104.7 | 73.9 | 53.5 | 35.0 |
| 9700 PRO | 117.9 | 97.0 | 67.0 | 47.3 | 31.0 |
| X800 XT PE % Difference | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| X800 PRO | 1.8% | 4.7% | 19.4% | 21.8% | 27.3% |
| 9800 XT | 5.1% | 21.0% | 55.0% | 75.4% | 91.8% |
| 9800 PRO | 7.2% | 23.9% | 60.2% | 82.3% | 103.6% |
| 9700 PRO | 12.7% | 33.8% | 76.8% | 106.3% | 130.1% |
| X800 PRO % Difference | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| 9800 XT | 3.3% | 15.6% | 29.8% | 43.9% | 50.7% |
| 9800 PRO | 5.4% | 18.4% | 34.2% | 49.6% | 60.0% |
| 9700 PRO | 10.7% | 27.8% | 48.1% | 69.3% | 80.7% |
Our TR:AoD benchmark is one title that is beginning to show some fill-rate limitations even with normal rendering, thanks to its quote shader intensive nature with the depth of field post processing effects. Here we can see that the X800 XT PE scales to as high as a 92% greater performance than the 9800 XT, with the PRO having a 51% advantage.
| TR:AoD - 4X FSAA + 16X AF (FPS) | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| X800 XT PE | 101.3 | 112.5 | 93.3 | 71.2 | 49.6 |
| X800 PRO | 121.3 | 99.6 | 77.5 | 60.0 | 40.7 |
| 9800 XT | 102.6 | 78.3 | 56.1 | 39.3 | 26.0 |
| 9800 PRO | 98.1 | 74.8 | 52.7 | 34.4 | 22.9 |
| 9700 PRO | 90.6 | 67.9 | 46.5 | 30.9 | 20.5 |
| X800 XT PE % Difference | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| X800 PRO | -16.5% | 13.0% | 20.4% | 18.7% | 21.8% |
| 9800 XT | -1.2% | 43.7% | 66.4% | 81.2% | 90.7% |
| 9800 PRO | 3.3% | 50.4% | 77.2% | 106.9% | 116.2% |
| 9700 PRO | 11.9% | 65.8% | 100.6% | 130.3% | 142.0% |
| X800 PRO % Difference | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| 9800 XT | 18.2% | 27.2% | 38.2% | 52.7% | 56.7% |
| 9800 PRO | 23.6% | 33.1% | 47.1% | 74.4% | 77.6% |
| 9700 PRO | 33.9% | 46.7% | 66.6% | 94.1% | 98.8% |
With both 4X FSAA and 16X AF enabled the performance difference between the X800 XT PE and the 9800 XT remains about the same, albeit at a lower FPS. The gap between the X800 PRO and the 9800 XT does open up a little further though.
| X800 XT PE (FPS) | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| Normal | 132.9 | 129.8 | 118.4 | 97.5 | 71.3 |
| 16X AF | 132.1 | 129.3 | 118.1 | 97.1 | 71.2 |
| 4X FSAA | 125.6 | 112.8 | 93.4 | 71.2 | 49.7 |
| 4X FSAA + 16X AF | 101.3 | 112.5 | 93.3 | 71.2 | 49.6 |
| % Diff from Normal | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| 16X AF | -0.6% | -0.3% | -0.3% | -0.5% | -0.2% |
| 4X FSAA | -5.4% | -13.1% | -21.1% | -27.0% | -30.3% |
| 4X FSAA + 16X AF | -23.8% | -13.3% | -21.2% | -27.0% | -30.5% |
As we’ve seen with other Radeons enabling or disabling AF in this title appears to make little difference to the rendering performance. With 4X FSAA enabled though, there is about a 30% performance decrease at high resolutions thanks to the increased bandwidth demands of 4X FSAA.
| X800 PRO (FPS) | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| Normal | 130.6 | 124.0 | 99.2 | 80.1 | 56.0 |
| 16X AF | 130.5 | 123.0 | 98.9 | 80.0 | 55.8 |
| 4X FSAA | 121.5 | 99.6 | 77.9 | 60.2 | 40.9 |
| 4X FSAA + 16X AF | 121.3 | 99.6 | 77.5 | 60.0 | 40.7 |
| % Diff from Normal | 640x480 | 800x600 | 1024x768 | 1280x960 | 1600x1200 |
| 16X AF | 0.0% | -0.8% | -0.2% | -0.1% | -0.4% |
| 4X FSAA | -6.9% | -19.6% | -21.5% | -24.8% | -27.0% |
| 4X FSAA + 16X AF | -7.1% | -19.7% | -21.9% | -25.1% | -27.3% |
The performance penalty for enabling 4X FSAA on the X800 PRO is a little less than it was with the X800 XT PE, possibly because it's not running entirely optimally under normal rendering yet.
