Ugh, ik dacht dat we dit nu wel gehad hadden, maar Tweak3D heeft er toch weer een stukkie over geschreven. Hij test de games Quake 3 en NFS:HS voor de verschillen tussen 16 en 32 bit, later volgen waarschijnlijk nog meer games.
Is there a clear winner between 16-bit and 32-bit rendering? In my opinion, no... not at this time, and there won't be until all games that utilize 32-bit rendering actually offer sufficient graphical improvement to warrant the performance hit. The visual quality is definitely more impressive when playing Q3Test, but not in all areas. Some items in the game clearly look better, while others look almost the same. Are these extra features worth a massive hit to your frame rate? Sure, if you have the performance to spare... but not everyone does.My P2 450 / TNT2 Ultra system running Q3Test at 1024x768x16bpp has relatively no performance issues: the game runs great. Occasionally the frame rate drops to about 30, but for the most part it stays well over that and runs smooth. However, when using 32-bit color, even 800x600 drops below 30 FPS when there is plenty of action on the screen. And there's no way I'm going to resort to using 640x480x32bpp just to ensure that I'll always have 30 FPS. At this point, 1024x768x16bpp seems much more appealing. When playing a fast paced game like Q3Test, I care much more about the frame rate and resolution than the image quality, and I'm certain that plenty of readers agree with me on this issue.
Voor de screenshots en de rest, klik hier.
