CMBB video card quality test results

[tecumseh]

[EDIT- there appears to be a major bug where high-end nvidia cards have downsampled textures on the mac. Both the mac128mb geforce 4 titanium and mac 64mb geforce 3 have blurry textures. The 64mb radeon 8500 does not. The mid-low range 32mb Radeon produces a crisper result than either expensive nvidia card. 64mb Radeon 8500]

(These are only Mac cards, but PC users might be interested too.)

There has been some confusion of the way certain mac cards display CMBB, and how the program downsamples textures based on the card's VRAM. I was quite disappointed the first time I got in close, particularly with the vehicle tracks, uniforms, wheat/steppe and the sky.

So I have collected some shots from a range of mac cards to compare. However it is difficult to draw conclusions from this because the resolutions are all different, and some mods have been installed.

But it is very clear that nvidia and ATI have different ways of displaying things like wheat and fences.

The best comparison to show the subtle downsampling is the 32mb Radeon AGP vs 32mb Radeon PCI. You'll see the later has downsampled (fuzzy) uniforms, while the former are crisp.

The problem is the 64mb gf3 also has fuzzy uniforms. They look identical to the gf2mx (my computer) and those are definitely the fuzzy bastards. Why the AGP Radeon looks better than the PCI Radeon and gf3 I don't know.

The 16mb Rage Pro shows a downsampled building and other ugly effects. Also there is a shot from CMBO on the same Rage Pro to show how it never downsampled.

I cannot tell if any of the nvidia cards have crisp uniforms, but it looks like the 128mb one might (tho the shot is only 800x600). It certainly should.

(If anyone wants to try the same screenshots, check out the "mac video card test' thread over in tech support, and download the scenario. I really would like to know which cards downsample uniforms)

32mb Radeon PCI

32mb Radeon AGP

32mb Radeon AGP #2

16mb Rage Pro

32mb gf2mx

32mb gf4mx

64mb gf3

128mb gf4 titanium

8mb Rage mobility

16mb Rage Pro (CMBO)

[ November 11, 2002, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[tecumseh]

Thanks to everyone who sent the screenshots to me

[War RaVeN]

Hmmmmm.

ok. :cool:

[lcm1947]

Very interesting. Thanks for showing them to us.

I actually don't see a whole lot of difference in them. Example: you would think the 128 mb would really out do the lower ones but unless it's my eyesight or monitor I really don't see much difference except in the 8 mb.

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by lcm1947:

Very interesting. Thanks for showing them to us.

I actually don't see a whole lot of difference in them. Example: you would think the 128 mb would really out do the lower ones but unless it's my eyesight or monitor I really don't see much difference except in the 8 mb.

yeah there seems to be two levels of downsampling - one pretty obvious one for low end systems and a more subtle one for medium systems. BFC have done a great job on the subtle one...it is quite hard to tell. But up next to each other, it's easy:

32mb radeon PCI

32mb radeon AGP

[ November 06, 2002, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[AndrewTF]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by lcm1947:

Very interesting. Thanks for showing them to us.

I actually don't see a whole lot of difference in them. Example: you would think the 128 mb would really out do the lower ones but unless it's my eyesight or monitor I really don't see much difference except in the 8 mb.

yeah there seems to be two levels of downsampling - one pretty obvious one for low end systems and a more subtle one for medium systems. BFC have done a great job on the subtle one...it is quite hard to tell. But up next to each other, it's easy:

32mb radeon PCI

32mb radeon AGP</font>

[Captain Wacky]

I used to have a Voodoo5, and with AA on CM looked OUTSTANDING, even better than my current GeForce3 Ti500

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by AndrewTF:

I quit and restarted CMBB, then began a new 500 pt QB on a small map. What a difference! I could post some comparitive screenshots when I get home.

Did you try again with the large scenario after you restarted? I have had textures go to lowest level downsampling (blurry mess) after I'd launched a few games in a row, but it was fixed after a restart. In my experience the downsampling has nothing to do with map size or complexity, but i could easily be wrong

[edited to say sorry to andrew for editing my reference to him which made him edit his post again]

[ November 06, 2002, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[Xavier]

Please, could someone explain me what are PCI and AGP please. I have an warning message about these stuff on my graphic card vonfiguration panel?

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by Xavier:

Please, could someone explain me what are PCI and AGP please. I have an warning message about these stuff on my graphic card vonfiguration panel?

PCI is a common interface for plugging things into your PC. Computers have PCI "slots" where you can plug in cards and expansions and stuff.

AGP is a much faster and newer interface specifically for graphics cards. There's usually only 1 slot. If you have an AGP slot it is worthwhile getting an AGP graphics card becasue it will communicate with your computer faster than the equivalent PCI card.

I think that is right

[AndrewTF]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by AndrewTF:

I quit and restarted CMBB, then began a new 500 pt QB on a small map. What a difference! I could post some comparitive screenshots when I get home.

Did you try again with the large scenario after you restarted? I have had textures go to lowest level downsampling (blurry mess) after I'd launched a few games in a row, but it was fixed after a restart. In my experience the downsampling has nothing to do with map size or complexity, but i could easily be wrong

[edited to say sorry to andrew for editing my reference to him which made him edit his post again]</font>

[Dirtweasle]

Has anyone had the chance to compare PC cards directly? I'm thing about the GeForce line up of Ti4200, 4400, 4600...

[tecumseh]

Here's what CMBB is almost supposed to look like. Side hull, track wheels and infantry uniforms are definately crisper than on all of the other screenshots. Still it is not perfect - the shadows suck, and the smoke - not pictured - is opaque. (Both of these might be driver issues, coz the 32mb radeon doesn't have these problems.)

64mb Radeon 8500

This looks better than the other screenshots to me. It shouldn't be better than the 128mb Titanium, but it is.

Why is CMBB downsampling on the 128mb titanium and the 64mb geforce 3?

This is a bug, and if i was Michael E who'd just paid for a new 128mb titanium just for CMBB I would be PISSED :mad:

[ November 07, 2002, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

Here's what CMBB is almost supposed to look like. Side hull, track wheels and infantry uniforms are definately crisper than on all of the other screenshots. Still it is not perfect - the shadows suck, and the smoke - not pictured - is opaque. (Both of these might be driver issues, coz the 32mb radeon doesn't have these problems.)

64mb Radeon 8500

This looks better than the other screenshots to me. It shouldn't be better than the 128mb Titanium, but it is.

Why is CMBB downsampling on the 128mb titanium and the 64mb geforce 3?

This is a bug, and if i was Michael E who'd just paid for a new 128mb titanium just for CMBB I would be PISSED :mad:

So - I should hold off on getting this new card too?

[JP Jones]

I have the 64mb Radeon 8500 and I love it. There is that issue with fog, but I dont care that much. The game looks great and runs smoothly. I put a few mods that I got here and there and they too look great.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Dirtweasle:

So - I should hold off on getting this new card too?

If CM would be the only reason you would be getting it, yes.

I want to say that I am not angry with the card, although I am mildly disappointed that it isn't showing better performance yet. what would have made me angry would have been if it had performed worse than my old card!

But as I posted elsewhere, waiting a year might see the price come down a lot, or significant improvements in drivers. Or if there is some problem with the CM code, maybe something will happen there.

Michael

[ November 07, 2002, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]

[tracer]

Doesn't some of the quality have to do with the system (including monitors) and the settings of that system,monitor settings, vid settings?? If a individual has a lower end sytem,(not to offend anyone, but "cheaper") would'nt that have some affect on the display? You can have a kick butt vid card, but if your mainboard is, well low budget, wouldn't that effect your display quality??

[Tha_Field_Marshall]

the new NV 30 card is supposed to rule the Radeon 9700. I heard that they are supposed to be pre selling them for christmas with delivery early next year.

[MasterGoodale]

MasterGoodale is dying to know the answer to these questions as he is also debating buying a new Vid Card. . .

I mean if my current TNT2 is performing better than most new cards I could buy for my system I'll just stay with the TNT2. Is the lack of fog really that big a deal in the game? What effect does it have on gameplay and the outcome? I mean if I PBEM with somebody who has fog and I don't, does he have an advantage?

Please help!

[L.Tankersley]

Originally posted by tracer:

Doesn't some of the quality have to do with the system (including monitors) and the settings of that system,monitor settings, vid settings?? If a individual has a lower end sytem,(not to offend anyone, but "cheaper") would'nt that have some affect on the display? You can have a kick butt vid card, but if your mainboard is, well low budget, wouldn't that effect your display quality??

It shouldn't affect display quality; it would probably affect framerate/responsiveness, and would definitely affect turn processing time.

[L.Tankersley]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

This looks better than the other screenshots to me. It shouldn't be better than the 128mb Titanium, but it is.

One caveat here: I provided the 8500 picture, and I sent the raw shots (taken with Cmd-Shift-3) in PICT format to Tecumseh. He did the JPEG compression. If other people sent him images in JPEG format, they may have introduced more compression artifacts than Tecumseh did with my picture (and things like blurry track wheels is just where compression artificts would be most noticable).

[tracer]

But aren't monitore sorta like T.V.s?? you know, you get a cheap T.V., and you get a expensive one, the pic quality is better on the the expensive one, I know monitors are differnt due to higher digital quality, but wouldn't the same idea apply?? Not trying to argue or anything, but this is interesting having people not connected to the vid card industry compare notes, (they aren't trying to sell anything)

[MasterGoodale]

YEAEAEAH BUCKO! Just kidding, but I am looking for a good answer to the question of which card to buy. I don't really want CMBB performance to be the ONLY factor but it is an important one. You would think these $200 cards would make anything look good! :mad:

[Fishu]

Radeons do have superior image quality over the geforces, what comes to accuracy of it.

Although geforces are more reliable all around - aka everything will work.

in 2d and 3d radeons will win geforces with image crispness hands down.

Mastergoodle,

TNT2 is a bottleneck with any CPU over 600mhz.

So I really doubt it's performing better than other cards if you're having like +800mhz CPU.

I went from TNT2 to Radeon 64mb while I had celeron at 850mhz (overclocked 566, working even better than at nominal clocks :>) and the difference in performance was huge.

FPS got much better all around.

Radeons however does not handle table fog, so it becomes a problem in some games.

Right out of memory comes in mind games like Combat Missions, Rogue Spear and Americas Army.

In RS and AA there is certain advantages without the fog, but in Combat Mission theres no advantage, except less prettyness.

However with GeForces same thing is achieved just as easily as disabling table fog

LTankersley,

Image quality DOES differ between video cards.

With GeForces it can even vary between the producers.. different GF GPU based graphics card producer can have better or worse image quality than the other.

With Radeons and Matrox graphics cards this is far lesser issue.

Matrox has the best image quality of the three, while Radeon is close second.

Having used variety of graphics cards, I can tell you there *is* a difference.

For example in simple 2D display status, say.. a yellow word fonts are solid yellow with Radeon, but with GeForce can have different shades of yellow.

Crispness is noticeable if takes a good look.

Then theres of course the things which affects graphics quality, which on the other hand is different issue than image crispness.

Anyone whos put some time into graphic card differences, can say that GeForces has always had worse image crispness than Radeons.

[L.Tankersley]

Obviously video cards affect output quality. I was responding to the quote,

"...but if your mainboard is, well low budget, wouldn't that effect [sic] your display quality?"

and was trying to point out that the video card is really the only component that will make a difference in the video signal that is sent out the VGA/other port on the back of the computer.

It's true that different monitors will affect perceived quality, but these screenshots aren't capturing the data as displayed on the system's monitor; they are capturing the data being sent to the monitor and thus can be used for comparisons on any system (subject to my earlier caveat about different compression artifacts).

It's also worth pointing out that this thread was initially started to compare Macintosh video cards. The Mac ATI cards, including the Radeon, do support fog (on the PC they don't). On the other hand, the Mac Radeon drivers apparently don't support transparent smoke (from fires, smoke shells, explosions and gun blasts).