ASUS V9280 Ti4200-8x "Super Fast"
Overclocking
There we are, arrived at last at the long-awaited topic... but there's nothing to make you happy. The overclocking potentials of the card proved to be quite middling. Frankly, we expected much more. We managed to get the cards run stably at the following frequencies: 303 MHz on the chip and 324 MHz (648 MHz DDR) on the memory. While it is a normal overclocked frequency for the Ti4200-8x, for the memory with its 2.8 ns timings and documented 700 MHz the resultant 648 MHz is not impressive at all. This is especially annoying because the memory is cooled and the cooling was improved through adding thermopaste under the wafer from behind the card. You may get a better luck since overclocking always depends on a particular specimen.
3D
To test the performance of the AsusV9280S video card based on the Ti4200 AGP 8x chip we assembled the two test systems:
Test system No. 1 (Hi-End system):
- Processor Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz;
- Motherboard - Intel 850EMV (i850E, 512 Mb RDRAM PC800), AGP 4x);
- Sound card Creative Sound Blaster Audigy;
- HDD Seagate Barracuda ATA IV 7200 rpm.
Test system No 2 (Mid-Range system):
We tested the performance in the following benchmarks and applications:
-
Return to Castle Wolfenstein - Checkpoint demo (OpenGL, Quake 3 core);
- Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo (Direct3D stress test benchmark);
-
DooM III E3 Demo (extremely resource-hungry overkill benchmark with shaders, bump-mapping, OpenGL and lots of other stuff to be topical by the end of 2003);
-
Code creatures demo (complex DirectX 8 benchmark);
-
3DMark 2001SE (synthetic Direct3D benchmark)
As I already said, there was nothing to complain about the 2D quality during the tests. At high resolutions with the refresh rate 85 Hz, the 2D quality was on par with that of the whole GeForce4Ti line, i.e. a bit above the average.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
This benchmark shows a strong dependence on the processor resources. So at low resolutions all the cards performed with practically identical results. Anyway, since the processor is powerful enough, the higher the resolutions the more vivid is the difference in scores. As is seen from this graph, the Asus card powers ahead of the Abit contender. As you can guess, that was possible due to the higher memory frequency offered by the Asus video card. But anyway the Ti4600 takes the lead.
With a less powerful processor, the card performed at very similar results. At high resolutions, the performance gap was slightly getting narrow, and at low resolutions a difference in scores albeit small did appear. As for the video card in question, the performance difference as compared to the 128 MB Abit becomes visible only at higher resolutions and it is negligible. Note that the 64 MB Abit video card on that platform showed much greater performance loss than on the former. Let me remind you that all 128 MB video cards, but for Gainward Ti4600, support the AGP8x (3.0), which anyway does not prevent Gainward from holding the first place.
Unreal Tournament 2003
Amusing enough, but in this benchmark the AsusV9280S card showed a performance absolutely adequate for its 'frequency/potentials' ratio. This can't be said about the Abit contender card which due to unknown reasons showed a performance higher than Ti4600. As for the remaining video cards, their performance is absolutely adequate Let's take a look how the situation changed on another test system:
As we see, it has changed radically. At first, the result looks more adequate although hard to explain. The performance of the cards varies no matter what their frequency characteristics and chip potentials are. At the highest resolution, AsusV9280S left a Ti4600-based video card behind at performance which was possible only due to optimizations inside the NV28 and using the AGP8x. In any case, both video cards based on the Ti4200-8x are on par with the Ti4600 and are quite competitive. Note that in a video card featuring 64 MB local memory performance losses at higher resolutions are substantial enough, which is another proof of necessity to have 128 MB onboard.
Code creatures
This benchmark is a real torture for the video subsystem and leaves the processor practically unloaded. It outputs up to 600 thousand polygons per frame and makes use of the vertex and pixel shaders version 1.1, that is why it does not run on Nvidia MX-Series video cards.
As is seen from the graph, the Asus9280S performance is practically matching to that of its competitor, Abit OTES 8x, although the latter takes a lead over Asus at high resolutions by merely 1 fps (this falls within the measurement errors). The Ti4600 preserves leadership in this benchmark, and the 64 Mb video card is well behind the 128 MB counterpart. See that GeForce3 on this graph is also used for reference :).
On another test system the result becomes more adequate again. AsusV9280 takes a lead over the Abit contender due to higher memory frequency at low resolutions and shows identical scores at high resolutions. The AGP8x does not help much and anyway the Ti4600 holds the leadership crown although does not support this new standard. The 64 Mb Ti4200 has once and for all lost its grounds at high resolutions.
3DMark2001SE
At this benchmark, all the Ti4200-based video cards showed practically identical performance scores, and only the 64 MB counterpart has fallen well behind the pack at 1600x1200. By now this benchmark is a bit outdated and does not pump up the accelerator to the full. The 64MB of local memory onboard are definitely insufficient, so the performance does not drop on cards with such memory capacity. This is contrary to latest games which do enjoy the memory on board the accelerator. In any case the leadership is indisputably taken by the Ti4600 that has gone well ahead of its lower-end brothers.
On a less powerful test system the trend stays the same. The Asus video card has slightly lagged behind the contender at low resolutions and performed a bit better at higher resolutions, but at any rate the Ti4600 has firmly taken a lead as ever.
Doom III Lite
At this benchmark, AsusV9280S showed itself as a fantastic performer. It only failed to outperform Abit video card at low resolutions, but anyway left the Gainward Ti4600 card behind. The similarity of results for video cards based on the Ti4200-8x chip is just another proof that the NV28 differs from NV25 not only in the presence of AGP8x. By the way, the 60 fps at 640x480 is quite enough for moderately decent playing the Doom. But the final version is unlikely to improve the speed characteristics essentially by virtue of several reasons.
Processor dependence
These days we quite often hear questions like in what extent the video card depends on the processor. To answer it in part we prepared some graphs in which we presented comparative data for one and the same video card, in particular, AsusV9280S, tested on our two test systems.
This graphs shows a strong dependence of the RTCW on the processor resources. On a more powerful system, the performance demonstrates a more linear change, which means the system is balanced. Only at low resolutions the cards performed with practically identical results. This can't be said about the other platform on which all the results are practically identical, and the performance drop starts only near the high resolutions. That is, the higher FPS is needed at low resolutions, the more powerful a processor is needed.
.
The situation here is practically identical to the previous except that the better 3DNow instructions set & Athlon optimization gives advantages to the test system featuring much lower clock speeds. Reminding you that at this benchmark the Ti4200-8x performance on both platforms was identical to that of Ti4600 that lacks support for AGP8x. Therefore, there is every reason to assume the performance boost on the second platform is not related to using AGP8x at all.
As I mentioned earlier, this benchmark does not depend on the processor, so the result is almost identical. But we've got to note the performance on the Athlon-based platform is slightly higher than that for the Pentium4 with the clock speed difference being as high as 1 GHz.
This benchmark exerts load on both the processor and the graphic accelerator in a manner balanced enough; the performance drop is linear and practically identical. But at lower resolutions the video card's performance on the Pentium4 is growing more intensely than on the Athlon.
Judging by the presented benchmarks, we can make a conclusion that a Ti4200-8x-based video card should be used with mid-end to top-end processors. Otherwise, the performance at low and high resolutions will be practically identical. As you can see, the processor dependence itself is in much extent a factor of the application that uses the 3D acceleration. While some games are insensitive to that, at other games you won't get a super FPS without a powerful processor however hard you try pushing down the resolution. There is one good piece of advice though - if your video card is good enough and the processor weak, then using the FSAA in low resolutions or gameplay in high resolutions without anti-aliasing may not strongly affect the overall performance, which in fact will give you a free graphics quality improvement.
FindingsFollowing its tradition, ASUS once again has proved its high name and produced a really excellent product offering an outstanding package bundle. The V9280 "Super Fast" has every reason to be regarded as best in class and take a place of dignity among the Ti4600-based video cards. What is more, it is free of those shortcomings typical of the OTES cooling system making immense noise even with the case cover closed, at the same time it has all their pros, e.g. increased memory speeds and GPU speeds. Moreover, its cooled memory runs at frequencies as high as those the full-featured Ti4600 offers and can be even slightly overclocked.
Even though we expected higher overclocking results from the Asus card, remember that overclocking requires unique approach to every video card specimen, so you may get a better luck. Among the cons is the traditionally faulty TV-in drivers that can be handled only by somebody having a decent experience in the field, showing immense patience and burning with desire to run it all up. For all that he will be generously rewarded by the excellent video recording quality provided a powerful enough processor with the good disk subsystem are there.
The innovative design of the TV splitter is quite handy and hopefully will get acclimatized with Asus for a long time, so we might see it in other Asus video cards. In all the other respects, the card showed good 2D quality on all the outputs, from the DVI up to the TV-Out, and of course excellent 3D quality.
Pros:
- Excellent package bundle;
- Innovative PCB design on the base of the Ti4600;
- GPU speeds increased to the Ti4400 level, while the memory speed pushed up to the Ti4600 level;
- Relatively quiet cooling system;
- Innovative arrangement of TV connection in the form of an external module.
Cons:
- Minor flaws in the software and drivers;
- Price a bit too high for products of this class.
Read more on this topic:
 |
Content: |
 |
|
|
Top Stories: |
|
 |
|
MoBo:
|
|
|
|
VGA Card:
|
|
|
|
CPU & Memory:
|
|
|
Abit Siluro GF4 Ti4200-8x OTES 128Mb
