3D Mark03
3D Mark03 v.330 – DirectX 9
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ ATI 0xAA/AF @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/01-s.jpg) ATI 0xAA/AF
|
|
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ NVIDIA 0xAA/AF @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/02-s.jpg) NVIDIA 0xAA/AF
|
|
Notes
There isn’t really a discernable difference between the ATI and NVIDIA screenshots at 1024x768, without any visual details enabled.
EDIT 8/22/03: Taking a closer look at the image, you can see slight differences between the RADEON 9800 PRO and the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, specifically if you look at the white rock on the left, just above the shoreline. Textures on the ATI card are slightly crisper than the GeForce FX, giving the 5900 Ultra a slightly blurrier look in comparison.
Anti-Aliasing
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ ATI 4xAA @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/03-s.jpg) ATI 4xAA
|
|
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ NVIDIA 4xAA @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/04-s.jpg) NVIDIA 4xAA
|
|
Notes
There is a much more pronounced discrepancy with 4x antialiasing enabled. The RADEON 9800 Pro maintains sharp textures and smoother lines, while the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra applies a more washed-out effect to the image. To illustrate the difference, check out the rock in the blown-up image (200 percent):

RADEON 9800 PRO

GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
Anisotropic Filtering
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ ATI 8xAF @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/05-s.jpg) ATI 8xAF
|
|
![Image Quality Showdown: ATI vs. NVIDIA [ NVIDIA 8xAF @ 800 x 600 ] > View Full-Size in another window.](images/06-s.jpg) NVIDIA 8xAF
|
|
Notes
The anisotropic filtering shots are not very conclusive. Both images are of comparable quality ; even blown up to 200 percent, the variance between them is too subtle to note.