ULTIMATE HARDWARE

ULTIMATE HARDWARE = CPU REVIEWS, MOTHERBOARD REVIEWS, PERFORMANCE DATABASE AND VIDEO CARD REVIEWS

S3 SAVAGE3D vs S3 SAVAGE4

"S3 Savage3D vs S3 Savage4 review testing the Diamond Stealth III S540 Savage4 to the Hercules Beast Savage3D. System used for testing was a AMD Duron 750Mhz and JETWAY 663AS Pro. Software used was PC Player Direct3D, Quake 2, Quake 3 Arena and Wintune 1997."

S3 SAVAGE4

I've always wondered what the difference in performance would be between the 2 different Savage chipsets. The Savage3D was plagued by poor driver support through out it's life. The Savage4 also started out with poor drivers but they have been improved alot since then and it's now one of the better budget video card. To avoid cpu limiting the performance of the video cards the tests are conducted on an AMD Duron 750mhz.

GENERAL SYSTEM INFORMATION

PROCESSOR AMD DURON 750 MHZ
VIDEO CARD DIAMOND SAVAGE4 PRO
HERCULES SAVAGE3D
S3 SAVAGE4 DRIVER V395_WIN9X_ME_82033
S3 SAVAGE3D DRIVER TBSTWIN9X102
MOTHERBOARD JETWAY 663AS PRO
MEMORY 128MB PC-100 SDRAM
OPERATING SYSTEM WINDOWS 98 SE
DIRECTX VERSION v8.0a

WINTUNE 97

800x600x16

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D91
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO117

800x600x32

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D55
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO58

HERCULES SAVAGE3D DIAMOND SAVAGE4 PRO
COMMENT - "At 16bit the Savage4 takes an early lead, it's 26mps clear of the Savage3D. At 32bit the Savage3D fights back and comes within 3mps of the Savage4."

PC PLAYER DIRECT3D

640x480x16

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D92
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO87

640x480x32

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D82
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO72

1024x768x16

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D55
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO51

1024x768x32

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D40
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO41

HERCULES SAVAGE3D DIAMOND SAVAGE4 PRO

BENCHMARK SETTINGS

Direct3D HAL
Gourad Shading Model
Solid Model
Textures Enabled
Fog Enabled
Dithering Enabled
Antialiasing Enabled
Bilinear Texturing Enabled
Transparent Textures Enabled
Perspective Enabled

COMMENT - "Wow what's this we see, at 640x480x16bit the Savage3D takes the lead by a small margin of 5fps. At 640x480x32bit this lead grows to 10fps, this result was unexpected. Are the Direct3D drivers of the Savage3D better than the Savage4? At 1024x768x16bit once again the Savage3D is beating the Savage4. At 1024x768x32bit it's too close to call. I have to mention the image quality of the Savage3D, it's very poor which probably indicates that the drivers are optimised for speed rather than image quality. No such image quality problems with the Savage4, it's image quality is excellent as always."


QUAKE 2

640x480x16

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D47
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO77

640x480x32

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D33
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO70

1024x768x16

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D21
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO35

1024x768x32

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D12
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO31

HERCULES SAVAGE3D DIAMOND SAVAGE4 PRO

BENCHMARK SETTINGS

3dnow OpenGL Driver
Demo1.dm2 benchmark
Fullscreen enabled
Texture Quality Full
8Bit Textures Disabled
Sync Every Frame Disabled

COMMENT - "With Quake 2 the Savage4 takes a huge lead of 30fps at 640x480x16bit. At 640x480x32bit the Savage4 is twice as fast as the Savage3D. With Quake 2 the Savage4 is playable (30fps minimum) at all resolutions tested. However the Savage3D is only really playable at low resolutions, at higher resolutions it's frame rate falls below 30ps which is unplayable."


QUAKE III ARENA

FASTEST

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D47
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO97

NORMAL

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3D30
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO55

HIGH QUALITY

HERCULES TERMINATOR BEAST SAVAGE3DN/A
DIAMOND STEALTH III S540 SAVAGE4 PRO24

HERCULES SAVAGE3D DIAMOND SAVAGE4 PRO

COMMENT - "The performance of the Savage video cards are pretty much the same like with Quake 2. The Savage4 takes a huge 50fps lead over the Savage3D at the fastest setting and 25fps at the normal setting. The Savage3D refused to run Quake 3 at high quality so only Savage4 results are available."

BENCHMARK SETTINGS

Default GLdriver
GL Extensions on
Fullscreen on
Demo001 Benchmark

FASTEST QUALITY

512x384 Video Mode
16Bit Colour Depth
16Bit Texture Quality
Vertex Lighting
Geometic Detail Low
Texture Detail 50%
Bilinear Texture Filtering

NORMAL QUALITY

640x480 Video Mode
16Bit Colour Depth
16Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
Geometic Detail Medium
Texture Detail 75%
Bilinear Texture Filtering

HIGH QUALITY

800x600 Video Mode
32Bit Colour Depth
32Bit Texture Quality
Lightmap Lighting
High Geometic Detail
Full Texture Detail
Trilinear Texture Filtering

CONCLUSION - "The Savage4 clearly beat the Savage3D which is to be expected. S3 had high hopes for the Savage3D when it was first released, it was plagued with poor driver support and it never recovered. The Savage4 also had poor drivers when it was released but S3 worked very hard and the latest drivers are stable and the performance is very good. 55fps on Quake 3 at 640x480x16bit with max settings is impressive for a budget card. It's not a GeForce beater but for light gaming it's just great, lets not forget that it does 32bit and has S3TC."

LATEST REVIEWS

"Gigabyte Radeon HD 5670 review also featuring Gigabyte Radeon HD 4770. Gigabyte Radeon HD 5670 has 4% higher clock speed, 20% higher memory speed and Directx 11 Support."

"MSI Radeon HD 5670 review also featuring MSI Radeon HD 4670. MSI Radeon HD 5670 has 4% higher clock speed and 51% higher memory speed than the MSI Radeon HD 4670."

"Sapphire Radeon HD 5670 review with Inno3D GeForce GT 240. Sapphire Radeon HD 5670 has 30% higher clock speed, 15% higher memory speed compared to Inno3D GeForce GT 240."

"The AMD Athlon II X2 240 Processor takes on the AMD Athlon64 X2 4800. AMD Athlon II X2 240 is a powerful 2.8Ghz Regor Socket AM2+ Processor which is compared to the Socket 939 2.4Ghz AMD Athlon64 X2 4800."

"Inno3D GeForce GT 240 review also featuring Powercolor Radeon HD 4770. Inno3D GeForce GT 240 has 27% lower clock speed, 6% faster memory speed and 544 less Shader Processors compared to the Powercolor Radeon HD 4770."

"Powercolor Radeon HD 4770 is compared to HIS Radeon HD 3870. Powercolor Radeon HD 4770 has 4% Lower Clock Speed, 30% Faster GDDR5 Memory and 320 Extra Shader Processors compared to HIS Radeon HD 3870."

"Gainward GeForce GT 240 review also featuring Asus GeForce 9600 GT. Gainward GeForce GT 240 has 27% lower clock speed, 42% higher memory speed and 32 extra Shader Processors compared to the Asus GeForce 9600 GT."

"MSI Radeon HD 5770 review also featuring Pov GeForce GTX 260. MSI Radeon HD 5770 has 33% higher clock speed, 59% higher memory speed and 584 extra Shader Processors compared to the Pov GeForce GTX 260."

"MSI Radeon HD 5970 review also features MSI GeForce GTX 295. MSI Radeon HD 5970 has 22% higher clock speed, 50% higher memory speed, 11% more memory and DirectX 11 Support compared to DirectX 10 with the MSI GeForce GTX 295."

"Sapphire Radeon HD 5970 OC review also features Sapphire Radeon HD 5870. Sapphire Radeon HD 5970 OC has 14% lower clock speed, 17% lower memory speed but twice the Shader Processors."

"Sapphire Radeon HD 5750 review also features Sapphire Radeon HD 5770. Sapphire Radeon HD 5750 has 18% lower clock speed, 5% lower memory speed and 10% less Shader Processors."

"Gigabyte Radeon HD 5750 review also features Gigabyte Radeon HD 4770. Gigabyte Radeon HD 5750 has 7% lower clock speed, 31% higher memory speed and 20% extra Shaders."

"Sapphire Radeon HD 5770 review also featuring Gainward Radeon HD 4870. Sapphire Radeon HD 5770 has 11% higher clock speed and 25% higher memory speed compared to the Gainward Radeon HD 4870."

ULTIMATE HARDWARE = EMAIL - LINKS - NEWS - SITEMAP - FACEBOOK - MYSPACE - TWITTER

COPYRIGHT © 2002 - 2010 ULTIMATE HARDWARE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

SEARCH ULTIMATE HARDWARE