COD2 benches..a comparison point?

[Bill]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_2_performance_ati_nvidia/default.asp

Finally! I have been waiting for these.

Since the X360 version is supposedly just as good, and running at 60 FPS..

Without AA a 7800GTX ruins it at 53.5 FPS at 1024X768 and 40.2 at 1280X1024, the closest rez's to 720P.

You can add 28% for RSX, as well.

 

[seismologist]

I'm getting close to 60fps on a 6600GT running at 1080p. Just have to turn down some options.

I think I have it set to bilinear with shadows turned off...

 

[Bill]

FS is showing it as one demanding game..

Also, the 7800 GTX may suffer from only 256 MB RAM, but then again the 256 X1800XL is doing well so I'm not putting too much stock in that..

 

[seismologist]

They must be running it on max settings. I have most options set at medium.

 

[AbbA]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_2_performance_ati_nvidia/default.asp

Finally! I have been waiting for these.

Since the X360 version is supposedly just as good, and running at 60 FPS..

Without AA a 7800GTX ruins it at 53.5 FPS at 1024X768 and 40.2 at 1280X1024, the closest rez's to 720P.

You can add 28% for RSX, as well.

The comparison with RSx have no sense becouse we know very little thing about it and becouse it's in a custom hardware with a powerfull chip like Cell.

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

Thats interesting, 7800GTX only get's a 7% performance loss when applying 4xFSAA @ 1280x1024

I thought it would be ALOT higher than that, is this good new's for PS3's FSAA abilities. Would the performance be alot less if code'd on a closed box system????

 

[MrWibble]

Thats interesting, 7800GTX only get's a 7% performance loss when applying 4xFSAA @ 1280x1024

I thought it would be ALOT higher than that, is this good new's for PS3's FSAA abilities. Would the performance be alot less if code'd on a closed box system????

I'm going to hate myself for this post, but honestly I'm beginning to get a headache decyphering your posts.

Apostrophes should not be used for plurals - they're for possessives and contractions. They are not simply inserted before the last letter in a random selection of words because they look pretty.

"That's" should have had one because it's short for "That is".

"Get's" shouldn't, "News" isn't even a plural, and I'm not sure what "Code'd" is all about either.

I'd actually almost rather see people not use punctuation than liberally sprinkle it where it doesn't belong... that's just painful.

OK, you can return to your regularly scheduled flamewar now

 

[London Geezer]

I'm going to hate myself for this post, but honestly I'm beginning to get a headache decyphering your posts.

Apostrophes should not be used for plurals - they're for possessives and contractions. They are not simply inserted before the last letter in a random selection of words because they look pretty.

"That's" should have had one because it's short for "That is".

"Get's" shouldn't, "News" isn't even a plural, and I'm not sure what "Code'd" is all about either.

I'd actually almost rather see people not use punctuation than liberally sprinkle it where it doesn't belong... that's just painful.

OK, you can return to your regularly scheduled flamewar now

Wh'y d'o yo'u hav'e to b'e so pick'y!!!!!one





Seriously, the level of grammar on these boards makes (NOT MAKE'S) me cringe, especially when it's (=IT IS) their (NOT THERE or THEY'RE) first language!!
!eVo!-X Ant UK i take it is from the UK... Dear god... And i'm not british myself!!! English is more or less my second language!!


[/rant]

 

[hey69]

It would be more intresting if we are certain COD2 is identical on both platforms.

(effects, AA aplied etc..)
Then those benches would have valid meanings .


btw why compare it with a 512mb videocard? xbox360 has a shared memorystructure, it doenst use all of its memory for gfx.

please dont be so picky about language type mistakes. as long it is readable what's the problem? should we pass an exam before posting here?

 

[London Geezer]

should we pass an exam before posting here?

Yes. And a psychological test too would be helpful.

To stay on topic, unless the 2 versions are running at the same settings, what's the point of this comparison?!

 

[MrWibble]

English is more or less my second language!!
[/rant]

Hehe..

The thing is I know many people here do not have English as a first language but I can't say that I've ever had a problem with a non-native speaker. It's not that I'm any more tolerant, but that they're actually often better at writing coherent English than those whose language it actually is...

Honestly, kids today! What are they teaching in schools?!

[/grumpy old man]

 

[hey69]

the p0int? that woult be funnhy noh?

 

[Hardknock]

Since the X360 version is supposedly just as good, and running at 60 FPS..

7800GTX = 40.2fps at 1280X1024, the closest rez's to 720P.

Interesting find!

Also from that site, when they added 2x AA and 8xAF

7800GTX = 34.6 fps

 

[Hardknock]

To stay on topic, unless the 2 versions are running at the same settings, what's the point of this comparison?!

Well the Xbox 360 version is supposed to have more advanced effects if that's what you're asking. Also the Original poster's comparision for the PC version was without any AA applied.

 

[London Geezer]

Does the X360 version still only have bilinear filtering? (no AF and not even Trilinear?)

Don't know, i think benchmarks between 2 different versions of the same game are useless.

Benchmarks in the PC world are done on the same copy of the game running on different machines. Like the HL2 or Farcry benchmarks. Same game, different machine, so you see how that one game runs on each machine.

Once you have a "PC version" and a "X360 version" (which is completely different since it has to run on completely different hardware and is hand-tuned accordingly), the relevance of the benchmark starts to fade... One version is done specifically for one closed box system, probably with different details of textures, models, particles, probably physics, more advanced shaders as you say....

Obviously it all depends on how "optimised" the game is for X360 (it could very well be an awful port job that could run much better than it does, which i tend to believe actually), but there is so much that can be different that the whole test is invalidated.

 

[MrWibble]

Well the Xbox 360 version is supposed to have more advanced effects if that's what you're asking. Also the Original poster's comparision for the PC version was without any AA applied.

Attempting to get myself back on topic here, it's tricky to make good comparisons between different PC hardware, even if you assume the console chips are nearly equivalent.

All it takes is for a few of the commonly used shaders to be optimised better on one card over the other, or for one option selected to fall off the fast-path on a given driver, and you're looking at a potentially disproportionate performance gap opening up.

Changing from one 32bit texture format to another perfectly equivalent one could actually switch the results over quite drastically, if the drivers happen to want to do things differently.

Unless you know for sure that the test was optimised specifically for each platform then you cannot really assess any kind of relative performance, and even then you're quite often measuring more about the driver than the hardware.

Benchmarks and comparisons like this are kind of interesting but really all they tell you is what kind of performance to expect if you run the same game on the same drivers on the same hardware platform as the tester. The further you get away from the same setup, the more chance the results might completely change.

 

[Titanio]

They've obviously optimised the X360 version more than they did for any one PC configuration, or the PC configuration you're comparing against. You're comparing a version that has to work across so many different configurations to one aimed at a single box. It's not a completely normalised comparison (I know, you ask what is? Possibly nothing unfortunately, unless we can prove that no more effort was put into optimisation for the console vs the PC configuration you're benching against).

 

[Hardknock]

Yeah the comparision is a bit skewed, but I do feel since the Xbox 360 "version" has more advanced effects and running at a better frame per second shows that Xenos is more powerful than the 7800GTX. Now just how powerful depends on how well they tuned the game to the hardware or if it was just a quick job and somewhat sloppy(which is what I'm thinking.)

So anyway I guess you're right, this isn't really a valid comparison

 

[London Geezer]

Yeah the comparision is a bit skewed, but I do feel since the Xbox 360 "version" has more advanced effects and running at a better frame per second shows that Xenos is more powerful than the 7800GTX. Now just how powerful depends on how well they tuned the game to the hardware or if it was just a quick job and somewhat sloppy(which is what I'm thinking.)

So anyway I guess you're right, this isn't really a valid comparison

Couldn't it not mean what we've said already many times, that the X360 version is more optimised to run on the only hardware it's supposed to run (the X360)?

Rethorical question by the way.

 

[Hardknock]

Well I said it wasn't a valid comparision. What more do you want from me?