apologies to you folks that are still running
your desktop at 800X600 resolution or
lower. The following spreadsheet generated
by the Video 2000 tests, contains a lot of
data. Even with most of the individual
details not shown, this image is larger than
800X600. However, the file size is
relatively small with this gif.
2000 - Video Mark Comparison Details
would bet most of you die-hard NVidia fans were
very surprised when you saw that the GeForce DDR
got beaten by the ATI Rage Fury 128 Pro.
Here you can see that not only does the Rage Pro
beat all the other cards in the overall Video
2000 score but it also has the lower CPU
utilization. This means you won't need a
P3-733 to play DVDs with the ATI card.
Most of the other cards here, especially the
G400 and with the possible exception of the
V3-3500TV, should also handle well with mid
range systems. I was very surprised that
the V3 had such high CPU utilization.
Perhaps this was due to software decoder
performance issues with the Voodoo compatible
you can see, each board used its own
"default decoder". This is the
Software DVD decoder that is installed with the
drivers for each board. MadOnion also
tests each board against its own "reference
decoder". The performance of the
reference Video 2000 decoder was lower across
the board with higher CPU utilization, as one
final score matters
raw performance tests, the GeForce barely edged
out the ATI Rage but I would speculate that in a
lower end system, this would not be the case, as
the GeForce CPU utilization is higher.
Matrox was the leader in raw performance but I
would expect that gap to close, with a lower end
CPU, due to their slightly higher CPU
utilization as well. Also
of note, is the fact that the ATI and 3dfx cards
do not use AGP transfers for Digital Video
processing memory requirements. Digital
Video does not need the bandwidth associated
with AGP transfers like 3D Graphic Acceleration
an important aspect of this test is the
"Features" category. Here as you
will see, the raw performance leader Matrox,
also has the least number of on board
features. This has an effect on
performance of DVD playback which is indeed
faster but not as good in the area of quality.
This, you can see in the Quality Score for the
G400, which is lower than both the GeForce and
the Rage Fury Pro. This is a surprising
turn of events for the G400, which is known to
have exceptional 3D image quality.
all intents and purposes, the ATI card has the
highest quality and the most features of this
round-up along with top end performance in line
with the others. It seems, at least from
these tests, that the Rage Fury 128 Pro has the
best overall performance which is why its
overall Video Mark is the highest.