The Active Network
ActiveWin: Reviews Active Network | New Reviews | Old Reviews | Interviews |Mailing List | Forums 
 

Amazon.com

  *  


Product: 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500DV
Company: Hercules
Website: http://www.hercules.com
Estimated Street Price:
$299.99
Review By: Julien Jay

Open GL Benchmarks

Table Of Contents
1: Introduction
2: Radeon 8500 Architecture
3: Accessories
4: Software
5: Direct 3D Benchmarks
6: OpenGL Benchmarks
7:
Conclusion

   Now is a great classic: the Quake III Arena benchmark. Quake III is a famous OpenGL game that intensively uses the GPU as well as the CPU of the computer.

 

 

In this first Quake III test, the Hercules 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV gives the slowest result but it remains totally acceptable. In 1024*768*16, the GeForce 3 Ti 500 is 15% faster than the Hercules 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV. In 1280*1024*32, the ATI Radeon 8500 128MB is 30% faster than the 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV, while the ATI Radeon 8500LE is 14% faster than the 3D Prophet. Of Course the GeForce 4 Ti 4600 leads the race.

When enabling the 2x full screen anti aliasing mode, we notice a big difference between the various graphics cards we have tested. The 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV gives the slowest results, while the GeForce 4 Ti 4600 remains the king of the hill.In 1024*768*16 the GeForce III Ti 500 is 80% faster than the All In Wonder 8500 DV. In 1280*1024*32, the ATI Radeon 8500 128MB is 30% faster than the 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV and 12% faster than the ATI Radeon 8500LE.

Just like in FSAA 2x, with FSAA 4x enabled, the Hercules 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV can't render scenes in high resolutions: 1280*1024*16 or 1280*1024*32. In 1024*768*32, the ATI Radeon 8500 LE is 20% faster than the Hercules 3D Prophet All In Wonder 8500 DV. Still in 1024*768*32, the Radeon 8500 128MB is 32% faster than the All In Wonder 8500 DV and 10% faster than the ATI Radeon 8500 LE. Obviously both NVIDIA GeForce III Ti 500 & GeForce 4 Ti 4600 graphics cards lead the race.

 

 Direct3D Benchmarks Conclusion

 

  *  
  *   *