The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion GPU Performance
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 26, 2006 1:07 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Mid Range GPU Performance w/ HDR Enabled
Next we looked at mainstream GPU performance, targeting graphics cards that were priced at or below $300; for reference we've tossed in a few pairs of cards running in SLI or CrossFire.
Not only have we reduced the resolution, but we've significantly reduced the image quality settings here. The result is a good balance between image quality and performance, however we would much rather play with our high quality settings as Oblivion can be one very impressive looking game with the details cranked up.
The white lines within the bars indicate minimum frame rate
The king of the mid range is actually the Radeon X1800 XT offering pretty much the best performance you can get for under $300, even outperforming the GeForce 7900 GT. If you already have a Radeon X1600 XT and happen to own a CrossFire capable motherboard, then simply picking up one more X1600 XT will do wonders for your performance. Remember that the X1600 series can run in CrossFire mode without any external dongle, so all you need are two X1600 XTs and you'll be looking at fairly good performance. While we wouldn't recommend purchasing two X1600 XTs (you're far better off with a single 7900 GT), if you already have one it's the cheapest way to get a good performance boost in Oblivion.
The GeForce 7600 GT proves to be a good middle of the road performer here, offering good performance while being priced at under $200.
The GeForce 6600 GT is unfortunately overwhelmed by our medium quality settings, and unfortunately has now become a low end contender as far as Oblivion is concerned. Running a pair of 6600GTs in SLI improves performance a bit but still no where near what a pair of X1600 XTs will do in CrossFire mode.
The white lines within the bars indicate minimum frame rate
Once again we see that there's no significant performance difference between the GPUs at the top of the charts, but performance really begins to drop off after the 7600 GT.
The white lines within the bars indicate minimum frame rate
The Medium Quality Dungeon benchmark is very friendly to the NVIDIA cards here, with the first ATI showing being the X1800 GTO half way down the graph. The GeForce 7900 GT and Radeon X1800 XT continue to be the best performers here, but the 7600 GT isn't too far behind.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
100 Comments
View All Comments
smitty3268 - Friday, April 28, 2006 - link
Well, all the tests that had the XT ahead of the XTX were obviously CPU bound, so for all intents and purposes you should have read the performance as being equal.I would like to know a bit about the drivers though. Were you using Catalyst AI and does it make a difference?
coldpower27 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
Quite a nice post there, well said Jarred.JarredWalton - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
LOL - a Bolivian = Oblivion. Thanks, Dragon! :D (There are probably other typos as well. Sorry.)alpha88 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
Opteron 165, 7800GTX 256megI run at 1920x1200 with every ingame setting set to max, HDR, no AA, (16x AF)
The game runs just fine.
I don't know what the framerates are, but whatever they are, it's very playable.
I have a few graphics mods installed (new textures), and the graphics are good enough that I randomly stop and take screenshots, the view looked so awesome.
z3R0C00L - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
The game is a glimpse at the future of gaming. The 7x00 series is old. True, nVIDIA were able to remain competitive with revamped 7800's which they now call 7900's but consumers need to remember that these cards have a smaller die space for a reason... they offer less features, less performance and are not geared towards HDR gaming.Right now nVIDIA and ATi have a complete role reversal from the x800XT PE vs. 6800 Ultra. The 6800 Ultra performed on par or beat the x800XT PE. The kick was that the 6800 Ultra produced more heat (larger die) was louder (larger cooler) but had more features and was more forward looking. Right now we have the same thing.
ATi's x1900 series has a larger die, produces more heat (larger die means more voltage to operate) and comes with a larger cooler. The upside is that it's a better card. The x1900 series totally dominate the 7900 series. Some will argue about OpenGL others will point to inexistant flaws in ATi drivers... the truth is those who make these comments on both sides are hardware fans. Product wise.. the x1900 series should be the card you buy if you're looking for a highend card... if you're looking more towards the middle of the market the x1800XT is better then the 7900GT.
Remember performance, features and technology.. the x1k series has all of them above the 7x00 series. Larger die space.. more heat. Larger die space.. more features.
Heat/Power for features and performance... hmmm fair tradeoff if you ask me.
aguilpa1 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
inefficient game programming is no excuse to go out and spend 1200 on a graphics system. Games like the old Crytek Cryengine have proven they can provide 100% of the oblivion immersion and eye candy without crippling your graphics system and bring your computer to a crawl, ridicoulous game and test,....nuff said.dguy6789 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
The article is of a nice quality, very informative. However, what I ponder more than GPU performance in this game is CPU performance. Please do an indepth cpu performance article that includes Celerons, Pentium 4s, Pentium Ds, Semprons, Athlon 64s, and Athlon 64 X2s. Firing squad did an article, however it only contained four AMD cpus that were of relatively the same speed in the first place. I, as well as many others, would greatly appreciate an indepth article speaking of cpu performance, dual core benefits, as well as anything else you can think of.coldpower27 - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
I would really enjoy a CPU scaling article with Intel based processors from the Celeron D's, Pentium 4's, and Pentium D's in this game.frostyrox - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
It's something i already knew but I'm glad Anandtech has brought it into full view. Oblivion is arguably one of the best PC games i've seen in 2006, and could very well turn out to be one of the best we'll see all year. Instead of optimizing the game for the PC, Bethesda (and Microsoft indirectly) bring to the PC a half *ss, amature, embarassing, and insanely bug-ridden 360 Port. I think I have the right to say this because I have a relatively fast PC (a64 3700+, x800 xl, 2gb cosair, sata2 hdds, etc) and I'm roughly 65hrs into Oblivion right now. Next time Bethesda should use the Daikatana game engine - that way gamers with decent PCs might not see framerates of 75 go to 25 everytime an extra character came onto the screen and sneezed. Right now you may be thinking that I'm mad about all this. Not quite. But I will say this much: next time I get the idea of upgrading my pc, I'll have to remember that upgrading the videocard may be pointless if the best games we see this year are 360 ports running at 30 frames. So here's to you Bethesda and Microsoft, for ruining a gaming experience that could've been so much more if you gave a d*mn about pc gamers.trexpesto - Thursday, April 27, 2006 - link
Maybe Oblivion should be $100?