![[H]ardOCP](/images/blank.gif){kind=small}
- Date:
- Tuesday , November 10, 2009
- Author:
- Mark Warner
- Editor:
- Brent Justice
- Google +1
Need for Speed SHIFT Gameplay Performance and IQ
We have an exclusive first look at performance in Need for Speed SHIFT using a new patch due out at the end of this month, as well as a new AMD driver which improves performance in this game. We test gameplay on nine video cards, low end to high end, and examine gameplay performance and image quality.
Highest Playable - 2560x1600
The resolution of 2560x1600 has been the domain of the high end performance enthusiast, though it is certainly not exclusive any longer. Traditionally, gaming at this very high resolution has required a strong video card, a fast and powerful CPU to feed that video card, and a robust system memory bus. That said, the rampant increase in GPU power over the past 2 years coupled with a shift of focus from PC-first to Console-first games has changed the outlook somewhat. Quite a few games are now playable with very high settings at 2560x1600 on a wide variety of relatively inexpensive video cards.
Enthusiast
Our high-end video cards all performed wonderfully at 2560x1600. The Radeon HD 5870 stole the show, but that is not to say that the GeForce GTX 295 and the Radeon HD 4870 X2 were not impressive. The Radeon HD 4870 X2 delivered some truly impressive framerates, and was in fact nearly the equal of the Radeon HD 5870 in terms of raw framerates. However, framerates are not everything. With the Edge-Detect Custom AA filter enabled on the Radeon HD 4870 X2, there was a jerky and jittery quality to the gameplay. The jitteriness made the game unpleasant to play, and it was present with both 12X CFAA and 24X CFAA. But without that feature enabled, gameplay was great. Certainly, 8X MSAA at 2560x1600 is more than adequate, and with the HD 4870 X2 and the GeForce GTX 295, it was not a problem.
The GeForce GTX 295 did not give us numbers quite as impressive as the Radeon HD 4870 X2, but it was still solid and playable. We did of course attempt to push it up to 16xQ CSAA, but we were treated to unplayable framerates for our trouble.
The Radeon HD 5870 did not exhibit the same trouble at 2560x1600 with 24X CFAA enabled, and in fact the game was smooth and fluid. In our first experience with the Radeon HD 5870, we found that 12X CFAA was the highest level of AA we could enable at 2560x1600 in this game. It seems that with Patch 2 and the latest AMD driver things have changed for the positive in a big way.
Performance
In the less expensive realm of video cards, we found that performance was still quite high. The GeForce GTX 285 was playable and fluid with 16X CSAA enabled, while its slightly slower cousin gave us 8X CSAA. The Radeon HD 5850 was capable of 8X MSAA, which is a higher quality sample rate than 8X CSAA and 16X CSAA. Recall that 8X and 16X CSAA both take only 4 color and z samples, compared to 8 samples performed by 8X MSAA.
So in this sector, at this resolution, the Radeon HD 5850 outperformed the GeForce GTX 285 and GTX 275 by a large margin.
Mainstream
In the mainstream, the Radeon HD 5770 outshone the others. This was to be expected; however, as it is the most expensive of the three video cards we tested in this segment. The GeForce GTX 250 and Radeon HD 5750 turned in nearly identical performances, allowing us to use the same settings and giving us almost identical framerates. The Radeon HD 5770 allowed 4X MSAA, compared to no AA enabled by the HD 5750 and GTS 250, with framerates slightly lower than the other two video cards here.
Life At 2560x1600
At 2560x1600, our stars were the Radeon HD 5870, the GeForce GTX 275, and the Radeon HD 5770. The HD 5870 gave us a truly staggering level of performance enabling the highest AA setting that video card is capable of at this high resolution. The GeForce GTX 275 balanced a high AA setting with good performance and a low price, at least relative to that of the Radeon HD 5870. The Radeon HD 5770 gave us a great performance for a truly great price, under $200.