SPECviewperf 10 – Multisample Testing
SPECviewperf 10
SPECviewperf tests FSAA performance by running its standard test suite several times, setting the FSAA feature of the graphics card being tested to all possible FSAA sample values. If a graphics card supports up to 16 samples – supporting 16, 8, 4, and 2 samples – the test would run five times, running tests for 16, 8, 4, 2, and no samples.
The test is run with no FSAA enabled so that a baseline test result can be produced. The goal of the test is to determine what performance penalty, if any, enabling FSAA with a given sample rate incurs. During the individual tests, screen shots are captured. This allows the tester to review the effects that FSAA is having on the rendered image. It is important to note that as FSAA is altering the image, there is no way to automatically validate pixel accuracy of the images rendered. It is up to the tester to evaluate the individual image captures to determine if the FSAA-produced images for a given sample size are visually pleasing to the user. As mentioned earlier, a subjective evaluation is necessary as individual preference for the FSAA results plays a part with respect to the aesthetic quality of the images produced.
If the FSAA test produces a score that is within 10 percent of the non-FSAA score, under SPECviewperf 10 rules that score will be considered valid for the specific sample rate. If a SPECviewperf test score for a particular test is 20.0, for example, and the same test score with FSAA enabled with a sample of 8 produces 19.5, the official results will be listed as 20.0 with FSAA up to a sample of 8 enabled. Sample rates may affect individual tests differently with respect to performance, so each test will include the best FSAA sample rate score within the 10-percent threshold. If no sample rate falls within the 10-percent threshold, the test score will indicate that no FSAA sample rate achieved the performance threshold for this test.
SPECviewperf tests FSAA performance by running its standard test suite several times, setting the FSAA feature of the graphics card being tested to all possible FSAA sample values. If a graphics card supports up to 16 samples – supporting 16, 8, 4, and 2 samples – the test would run five times, running tests for 16, 8, 4, 2, and no samples.
The test is run with no FSAA enabled so that a baseline test result can be produced. The goal of the test is to determine what performance penalty, if any, enabling FSAA with a given sample rate incurs. During the individual tests, screen shots are captured. This allows the tester to review the effects that FSAA is having on the rendered image. It is important to note that as FSAA is altering the image, there is no way to automatically validate pixel accuracy of the images rendered. It is up to the tester to evaluate the individual image captures to determine if the FSAA-produced images for a given sample size are visually pleasing to the user. As mentioned earlier, a subjective evaluation is necessary as individual preference for the FSAA results plays a part with respect to the aesthetic quality of the images produced.
If the FSAA test produces a score that is within 10 percent of the non-FSAA score, under SPECviewperf 10 rules that score will be considered valid for the specific sample rate. If a SPECviewperf test score for a particular test is 20.0, for example, and the same test score with FSAA enabled with a sample of 8 produces 19.5, the official results will be listed as 20.0 with FSAA up to a sample of 8 enabled. Sample rates may affect individual tests differently with respect to performance, so each test will include the best FSAA sample rate score within the 10-percent threshold. If no sample rate falls within the 10-percent threshold, the test score will indicate that no FSAA sample rate achieved the performance threshold for this test.
Probably just as important as the base results in our SPECviewperf 10 testing, we can evaluate here how the four professional level graphics cards scale with increased anti-aliasing on the various test scenarios. The AMD FirePro cards supported up to 8xAA in our testing while the NVIDIA Quadro cards went all the way up to 32xAA – already a big plus for NVIDIA right off the bat.
The results here are plentiful and interesting to analyze. For example, in our first result with 3dsmax-04, we can see that both the Quadro FX 3700 and the FirePro v5700 have their first significant drop in performance at the 8xAA level indicating that the smaller frame buffer (512MB versus 1.0GB or 1.5GB) comes to be a limiting point. For the most part, the GPUs scale as we more or less expected when compared to the base (0xAA) results. Exceptions can be seen, such as the flat results in the SolidWorks test for the AMD cards, but in general if a particular benchmark was suited to either the Quadro or FirePro line before, that remains.
The results here are plentiful and interesting to analyze. For example, in our first result with 3dsmax-04, we can see that both the Quadro FX 3700 and the FirePro v5700 have their first significant drop in performance at the 8xAA level indicating that the smaller frame buffer (512MB versus 1.0GB or 1.5GB) comes to be a limiting point. For the most part, the GPUs scale as we more or less expected when compared to the base (0xAA) results. Exceptions can be seen, such as the flat results in the SolidWorks test for the AMD cards, but in general if a particular benchmark was suited to either the Quadro or FirePro line before, that remains.
This is a really important
This is a really important article. Actually i am using NVIDIA but my company bought ATI and actually i am really happily surprised that ATI is really good. Linsey from 3d max dersleri
I need to know where I can
I need to know where I can purchase the auxiliary power connector for my nvidia quadro 3700 video board.