|Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 5850 Video Card 21162-00-50R|
|Reviews - Featured Reviews: Video Cards|
|Written by Olin Coles|
|Thursday, 15 October 2009|
Page 11 of 16
Resident Evil 5 Tests
Built upon an advanced version of Capcom's proprietary MT Framework game engine to deliver DirectX 10 graphic detail, Resident Evil 5 offers gamers non-stop action similar to Devil May Cry 4, Lost Planet, and Dead Rising. The MT Framework is an exclusive seventh generation game engine built to be used with games developed for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and PC ports. MT stands for "Multi-Thread", "Meta Tools" and "Multi-Target". Games using the MT Framework are originally developed on the PC and then ported to the other two console platforms.
On the PC version of Resident Evil 5, both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 modes are available for Microsoft Windows XP and Vista Operating Systems. Microsoft Windows 7 will play Resident Evil with backwards compatible Direct3D APIs. Resident Evil 5 is branded with the NVIDIA The Way It's Meant to be Played (TWIMTBP) logo, and receives NVIDIA GeForce 3D Vision functionality enhancements.
NVIDIA and Capcom offer the Resident Evil 5 benchmark demo for free download from their website, and Benchmark Reviews encourages visitors to compare their own results to ours. Because the Capcom MT Framework game engine is very well optimized and produces high frame rates, Benchmark Reviews uses the DirectX 10 version of the test at 1920x1200 resolution. Super-High quality settings are configured, with 8x MSAA post processing effects for maximum demand on the GPU. Test scenes from Area #3 and Area #4 require the most graphics processing power, and the results are collected for the chart illustrated below.
Resident Evil 5 has really proved how well the proprietary Capcom MT Framework game engine can look with DirectX 10 effects. The Area 3 and 4 tests are the most graphically demanding from this free downloadable demo benchmark, but the results make it appear that the Area #3 test scene performs better with NVIDIA GeForce products compared to the Area #4 scene that favors ATI Radeon GPUs. Although this benchmark tool is distributed directly from NVIDIA and GeForce Forceware drivers likely have optimizations written for the Resident Evil 5 game, there doesn't appear to be any favoritism towards GeForce products over Radeon counterparts from within the game itself.
Even so, the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 (aka GeForce 9800 GTX+) produced 33/35 FPS between the two tests, which indicates that older graphics cards can play Resident Evil 5 at 1920x1200 and still produce good 30+ frame rates with maximum settings. The ATI Radeon HD managed only 36 FPS in test scene 3, while jumping to 47 FPS in test scene 4. At this point driver optimizations could account for the disparity between test scenes, but the Resident Evil 5 game itself still 'normalizes' in other scenes.
It's a little suspicious how the GeForce GTX 260 can achieve 54 FPS in Area #3 while the ATI Radeon HD 4890 and Radeon HD 5850 can barely compete with 43 and 52 each respectively. Comparing the same three products in the Area #4 test indicates that the GTX 260 and Radeon 4890 are dead even at 57 FPS, while the Radeon 5850 enjoys a substantial lead of 70 FPS. Since Benchmark Reviews publishes test results and not editorials, I'll spare you my theories. It is however worth mentioning that the bounce from NVIDIA-heavy to unbiased scenes in the benchmark could be worth further investigation.
So by concentrating on test scene #4 the results appear to mirror what we've already seen in every other benchmark test conducted. ATI's mainstream Radeon HD 4770 trails behind the GeForce GTX 260, which also matches performance with the Radeon 4890. The ATI Radeon HD 5850 narrowly outperforms the GeForce GTX 285 by only a few frames, but the Radeon HD 5870 renders an 18% advantage.
Perhaps it's the beta ATI Catalyst drivers we're using for our tests, or perhaps NVIDIA had done a much better job optimizing their GeForce products for Resident Evil 5, but either way there are some significant inconsistencies between order-of-preference in these test scenes.