AMD's Radeon HD 6870 benchmarked? (updated more screens)

[Calmatory]

Are you saying the resolution doesn't matter, when dealing with tessilation..?

At least I am. Resolution (UNLESS IT CHANGES FIELD OF VIEW!) doesn't have ANYTHING to do with tesselation. The units which handle tesselation do not handle per-pixel operations, as far as I know, so there is no extra work for those units. The work remains the same regardless of the resolution.

However, obviously even with tesselation, the resolution has impact on the framerate, because there is a limit how many operations the ROPs can do, and how many operations the TMUs can do. With bigger resolution they need to do more. And they also need a bigger share of the memory bandwidth, too.

[Lanek]

At least I am. Resolution (UNLESS IT CHANGES FIELD OF VIEW!) doesn't have ANYTHING to do with tesselation. The units which handle tesselation do not handle per-pixel operations, as far as I know, so there is no extra work for those units. The work remains the same regardless of the resolution.

However, obviously even with tesselation, the resolution has impact on the framerate, because there is a limit how many operations the ROPs can do, and how many operations the TMUs can do. With bigger resolution they need to do more. And they also need a bigger share of the memory bandwidth, too.

offcourse it will, tesselation impact on the anti-aliasing and anistrope filtering....... indirect lightning, and reflect............... It was not the case when ATI have release the API cause driver was optimised for it, but as Microsoft have choose a diferent path in DX11............. it's impact it a lot.......... For make it simple, tesselation don't kill the framerate, but the addtion of the filters uppon the surface tesselated do it.......

[Xoulz]

At least I am. Resolution (UNLESS IT CHANGES FIELD OF VIEW!) doesn't have ANYTHING to do with tesselation. The units which handle tesselation do not handle per-pixel operations, as far as I know, so there is no extra work for those units. The work remains the same regardless of the resolution.

However, obviously even with tesselation, the resolution has impact on the framerate, because there is a limit how many operations the ROPs can do, and how many operations the TMUs can do. With bigger resolution they need to do more. And they also need a bigger share of the memory bandwidth, too.

Per-pixel..? Bro, resolution is ratio. More is more... 1920 x 1200 is more than 1920 x 1080. Any benchmark will change it's fov to render @ said resolution, otherwise it would just stretch scenes & be dysfunctional as a benchmark.

More to tessellate, more work to be done. Aren't you dismissing the obvious?

[Chumbucket843]

At least I am. Resolution (UNLESS IT CHANGES FIELD OF VIEW!) doesn't have ANYTHING to do with tesselation. The units which handle tesselation do not handle per-pixel operations, as far as I know, so there is no extra work for those units. The work remains the same regardless of the resolution.

are you familiar with a z-buffer? triangles directly affect rasterization and z-buffer performance. because of the way z-buffer algorithms are optimized(hierarchy, with quadtrees, coarse grained culling) tiny triangles hurt efficiency which tessellation creates.

i am saying that the # of triangles and their properties are directly related to rendering speed.

[saaya]

are you familiar with a z-buffer? triangles directly affect rasterization and z-buffer performance. because of the way z-buffer algorithms are optimized(hierarchy, with quadtrees, coarse grained culling) tiny triangles hurt efficiency which tessellation creates.

i am saying that the # of triangles and their properties are directly related to rendering speed.

why do you guys continue to discuss semantics though?
the original point was that one score was 1920x1080 and the other 1920x1200 and that they were not comparable... to which i and others said, the difference in unigine between those two resolutions should be tiny and the scores would be somewhat comparable...

and they are... somebody compared 1080 vs 1200 and the performance is almost the same...