Ultra At 1920x1200

**MikeC** · 08-17-07, 09:09 AM

The following benchmark results will be an update to our XFX GeForce 8800 Ultra XXX Edition review. We had requests to provide benchmark results at a resolution of 1920x1200, which is native to 24" LCD monitors like Dell's 2407WFP-HC, Samsung's SyncMaster 244T and Viewsonic's 28" VX2835wm.

We learned that the XXX Edition handles the majority of games at 2560x1600 with 4x AA. But how does it perform at 1920x1200 with 4x and higher levels of AA?

When AA was disabled, F.E.A.R. with soft shadows had an average frame rate of 91 fps while Far Cry with High-Dynamic Range (HDR) scored 110 fps.

Note that these results were run with a beefier processor (Core2 Duo E6850) than the one used in the XXX Edition review (E6700).

Also note that the results are for Windows XP. It's been a few weeks since I logged onto Vista

If you would like to see the differences in imaqe quality between the three AA modes, we've gotcha' covered - click here

Q · 08-17-07, 09:44 AM

I'm really surprised about how Quake 4 performs on all 8-series cards. It still rocks, but the eyecandy to FPS ratio on the other games is far more impressive. The Ultra is very impressive with high res gaming, even with AA.

Nice work, Mike.

Bman212121 · 08-17-07, 12:51 PM

EDIT: NVM, answered my own question.

SH0DAN · 08-26-07, 12:16 AM

Damn fast card.I wonder if we'll see G90/G92 soon.

08-17-07, 09:09 AM	#1
MikeC Administrator Join Date: Jan 1997 Location: Virginia Posts: 2,841	Ultra At 1920x1200 The following benchmark results will be an update to our XFX GeForce 8800 Ultra XXX Edition review. We had requests to provide benchmark results at a resolution of 1920x1200, which is native to 24" LCD monitors like Dell's 2407WFP-HC, Samsung's SyncMaster 244T and Viewsonic's 28" VX2835wm. We learned that the XXX Edition handles the majority of games at 2560x1600 with 4x AA. But how does it perform at 1920x1200 with 4x and higher levels of AA? When AA was disabled, F.E.A.R. with soft shadows had an average frame rate of 91 fps while Far Cry with High-Dynamic Range (HDR) scored 110 fps. Note that these results were run with a beefier processor (Core2 Duo E6850) than the one used in the XXX Edition review (E6700). Also note that the results are for Windows XP. It's been a few weeks since I logged onto Vista If you would like to see the differences in imaqe quality between the three AA modes, we've gotcha' covered - click here

08-17-07, 09:44 AM	#2
Q Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 7,798	Re: Ultra At 1920x1200 I'm really surprised about how Quake 4 performs on all 8-series cards. It still rocks, but the eyecandy to FPS ratio on the other games is far more impressive. The Ultra is very impressive with high res gaming, even with AA. Nice work, Mike.

08-17-07, 12:51 PM	#3
Bman212121 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,726	Re: Ultra At 1920x1200 EDIT: NVM, answered my own question.

08-26-07, 12:16 AM	#4
SH0DAN SGIRealityEngine Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Citadel Station Posts: 1,676	Re: Ultra At 1920x1200 Damn fast card.I wonder if we'll see G90/G92 soon. __________________ When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. -Fred Bastiat- The last official act of a corrupt government is to loot the nation. When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke ------------------ Q6600 g0 @3.20Ghz 1.30 VOLTS\|\|Tr ULTIMA 90I + \|\|2X1Gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer PC6400 4-3-3-7@ 400 x 8 BFG 260gtx MAXCORE55 @ 690/1420/2377 \|\|Asus P5K-Deluxe WiFi AP\|\|Corsair HX520\|\|Nec 2470WNX-BK + LG 1751S\| Lian Li PC-65B + II\|\|Western Digital 150GB RaptorX\|\| Samsung 750Gb HD x3\|\| WD 2500KS \|\|Samsung 183s\|\|SB Audigy 2 ZS\|\|Audio Technica ESW9's +red RSA Predator\|G11+MX518