View Single Post
Old 03-02-03, 02:15 PM   #99
legion88
WhatIfSports.com Junkie
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 135
Default

How many pixel pipelines do these cards have?

Radeon 9700Pro
Core: 466MHz, memory: 405MHz (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=330527)
Fillrate (single): 2020.5 mtexels/sec

# of pipes: 2020.5/466 = 4.33

Core: 324MHz, memory: 351MHz (
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=299936)

Fillrate (single): 1588.3 mtexels/sec

# of pipes: 1588.3/324 = 4.9


GeForce FX series

Core: 500Mhz, memory: 500MHz (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=305614)

Fillrate (single): 1314.1 mtexels

# of pipes = 1314.1/500 = 2.6

Core: 400Mhz, memory: 400MHz (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=270840)

fillrate (single): 1022.9 mtexels/sec

# of pipes = 1022.9/400 = 2.56

GeForce TI 4600

Core: 361Mhz, memory: 376Mhz (
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=237799)

fillrate (single): 1003.5 mtexels/sec

# of pipes = 1003.5 mtexels/361 = 2.77

Core: 315Mhz, memory: 375Mhz (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=312725)

fillrate (single): 1046.5 mtexels/sec

# of pipes = 1046.5/315 = 3.32

Radeon 8500

Core: 275MHz, memory: 275Mhz (
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=120189)

fillrate (single): 656.3 mtexels/sec

# of pipes = 656.3/275 = 2.39

Core: 319MHz, memory: 370MHz (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=239614)

fillrate (single): 1024.3 mtexels/sec

# of pipes = 1024.3/319 = 3.2

Quick notes to convert to pixel fillrate.
For FX/9700Pro, divide the single-texture fillrate scores(mtexels/sec) by one then multiply by the # of TMUs used in each pipeline (which is one). Thus, they are numerically the same.

For the 4600/8500, the # of TMUs is also one since the second TMU of each pipe in single-textured cases isn't being used.

For FX/9700Pro, divide the multi-texture fillrate scores (mtexels/sec, not shown) by four then multiply by the # of TMUs used in each pipeline (which is one).

For the 4600/8500, the # of TMUs is two.

If FutureMark didn't waste their time listening to 3dfx and used this marketing term we call "texel", then this stupid conversion equation would not have been needed.

Quick observations:

1) bandwidth is the #1 influence. Comparing the 370+ Mhz memory 8500s, TI 4600s and the 400MHz FX shows similar scores, regardless of theoretical maximum fillrate.

2) the FX multi-texture scores in mtexels (not shown) are typically more than 2X greater than single-texture scores. In pixels/sec--remember to convert, this means that the single-texture fillrate is only 61% faster when it should be around around 100% faster than the multi-texture case. Strongly suggests that the single-texture FX scores are lower than it should be, possibly related to #1--bandwidth.

3) double the available bandwidth, you double the calculated # of pipes (notice the 9700Pro scores). Again, this suggests that bandwidth is the issue here. Even with the Pro, the # of pipes don't add up to 8. Where's the noise?

4) the 9700Pro's multi-texture scores in mtexels (not shown) are typically just 50% greater. In pixels/sec, this means that the single-texture fillrate is a whopping 165% faster than multi-texture instead of 100%. This suggest that the multi-texture scores are lower than it should be for unknown reason.
legion88 is offline   Reply With Quote