COD2 benches..a comparison point?

[NVNDA]

I played it on X360 today

I have played both the X360 and PC COD2 demos and what I saw today on the X360 really dissapointed me. I was hoping for an upgraded experience, but the X360 version (on a nice samsung 720p LCD) looked like a PS2 game. The aliasing was horrible, and the frame rate would constantly drop any time action happened on screen. On my 6800, it looks twice as good, and has a better framerate at the same resolution (sans AA). It isn't even worth mentioning the textures - blah...

If this what the next generation of games is going to look like (both X360 and PS3) I might just skip both systems this time around.

One positive, it controled nicely for a console FPS and the X360 controller is nice overall.

 

[NVNDA]

Can't edit...

Also, this was not the same as the walmart LCD (which I was not able to look at because the 360 locked up) but a bigger 27" or so unit that was properly calibrated for brightness and color. It was the resolution that was not there...

 

[Bill]

I played the Wal Mart Demo the other day and it definitly looks much better and runs far smoother than on a PC with a Nvidia 6800 ULTRA card.

 

[Tap In]

Wait until a week from Tuesday and play the real game to compare. Not some older build demo. IMO

 

[pjbliverpool]

There are a vast number of possible reasons other than all the reviewers are lying fan-you-know-what liars. The PC code could be poorly optimized, especially if the X360 was the lead SKU, as the X360 sports unified shaders. Perhaps the game's doing a few subtle tricks with the unique hardware that don't run quite as smoothly in DX9.0. Or maybe it's taking advantage of the eDRAM, which the PC obviously doesn't have. All that horsepower means nothing if you don't use it well, and rather believing that everyone witnessing the two versions is lying or biased, it makes more sense to believe the PC hardware isn't being used well.

After all, how many PC games have you played that run like crap on powerful systems despite having nothing terribly taxing in terms of polygon countes, texture layers, or shader effects? Both Deus Ex games come immediately to mind as games that required far more horsepower to run smoothly than they should have. There are also a couple PS2-to-Xbox ports that didn't run as well on the Xbox, not due to the Xbox being less powerful, but simply due to less optimized code (MGS2 and Matrix: Path of Neo come to mind).

Your correct in that there are reasons why the PC version could theoretically perform worse. However the're all meaningless in light of benchmarks that we already have for the PC version showing it performs better.

Thats why I have the problem with these performance claims. One more day is all we have to wait for benchmarks of the final version on an SLI GTX 512MB setup. Then I think this argument will be put to rest.

 

[Master-Mold]

I have played both the X360 and PC COD2 demos and what I saw today on the X360 really dissapointed me. I was hoping for an upgraded experience, but the X360 version (on a nice samsung 720p LCD) looked like a PS2 game. The aliasing was horrible, and the frame rate would constantly drop any time action happened on screen. On my 6800, it looks twice as good, and has a better framerate at the same resolution (sans AA). It isn't even worth mentioning the textures - blah...

Sure..........

I have a 6800GT and in no way shape or form does it run as smoothly, nor does the X360 version look anything like a PS2 game.

Thats why I have the problem with these performance claims. One more day is all we have to wait for benchmarks of the final version on an SLI GTX 512MB setup. Then I think this argument will be put to rest.

So what are you waiting for a $3500 PC so you can point fingers and say "see I told you so!". Of course if you throw enough money and hardware at something it will eventually run better, but whats the point? The comparison should be made to a PC in the moderate what most people own range to see if the X360 is a super value, not lets build the best computer with $ being no object just to prove the X360 isnt worth it.

Its silly to even bring up a becnhmark with $1000+ spent on video cards alone to a $299 system.

You know whats really fast? A Lamborghini
You know whats really fast when you dont have a budget? The Space Shuttle

Silly comparison

 

[pjbliverpool]

Sure..........

I have a 6800GT and in no way shape or form does it run as smoothly, nor does the X360 version look anything like a PS2 game.



So what are you waiting for a $3500 PC so you can point fingers and say "see I told you so!". Of course if you throw enough money and hardware at something it will eventually run better, but whats the point? The comparison should be made to a PC in the moderate what most people own range to see if the X360 is a super value, not lets build the best computer with $ being no object just to prove the X360 isnt worth it.

Its silly to even bring up a becnhmark with $1000+ spent on video cards alone to a $299 system.

You know whats really fast? A Lamborghini
You know whats really fast when you dont have a budget? The Space Shuttle

Silly comparison

My signature is for situations like this, I suggest you give it a read.

 

[Master-Mold]

My signature is for people like you, I suggest you read it.

2) If you insist on comparing the performance of PC's to the performance of X360, please don't start talking about price when the X360 loses

Its always about price.

PC users always bring up some ridiculously terrible $ vs. performance system in order to squash the X360. Its very tiresome because we all know if you spend ludicrous amounts of money anything is possible.

People that do this need to keep their pie-hole shut because it is out of place. Is not like the X360 costs even $1000. CoD2 can be played on a system for $299 that will put up a good fight to a $1500 PC visually.

Can a $3000 PC best a X360: Yes, but why the hell does that matter? Its sad someone has to spend 10X the money to soundly beat a $299 console so its a moot point.

 

[pjbliverpool]

If coded properly. Yes.

Of course there are some games that have slowdown, but reviewers have stated there is no slowdown in the 360 versino of COD2, so what's your point?

No, amost all console games claim a framerate of 30 or 60fps in exactly the same way as is being claimed for CoD2 on the X360. And many have noticable slowdown. This is proof that simply saying "our game runs at 60fps" does not mean it maintains a solid 60fps 100% of the time.

You may not have experienced any slowdown in CoD2 but that doesn't mean it maintains 60fps. It could be averaging 50fps with regular dips into the 30's. As long as it doesn't drop below 30 you won't really notice it, especially using a control pad. Besides, im guessing you havn't played the game enough yet to see if there is no slowdown at all throughout the entire game regardless of the circumstances.

So just for the record because I know someone else will go off topic again by talking about price, let m ebe clear. The X360 is by far the most cost effective way of playing CoD2 smoothly and with great graphics. The question being adressed here is which platform is the game best on? That question has nothing to do with money and eveything to do with graphics and framerate.

 

[pjbliverpool]

2) If you insist on comparing the performance of PC's to the performance of X360, please don't start talking about price when the X360 loses

Its always about price.

PC users always bring up some ridiculously terrible $ vs. performance system in order to squash the X360. Its very tiresome because we all know if you spend ludicrous amounts of money anything is possible.

People that do this need to keep their pie-hole shut because it is out of place. Is not like the X360 costs even $1000. CoD2 can be played on a system for $299 that will put up a good fight to a $1500 PC visually.

Can a $3000 PC best a X360: Yes, but why the hell does that matter? Its sad someone has to spend 10X the money to soundly beat a $299 console so its a moot point.

No its not always about price. I know at least one person with a high end SLI PC setup already. In order to choose which system to buy CoD2 on he needs to know if the X360 will give a better performance than his PC. The cost of the 2 systems is totally irrelivant to that decsision, wouldn't you agree?

I plan to upgrade my own PC soon enough, I would do this wether COD2 existed or not, I will also be getting an X360 and therefore I too will need to make a decsision for which of my platforms to purchase CoD2 for. Would you care to explain to me why I would consider the cost of the hardware that I already own to make that decsision? Because beleive me im not planning to so if im doing womthing wrong, I think you should tell me.

Then off course there are people to whom £3000 is pocket change and if those people are graphics junkies like myself, they too will want to know which platform gives the better performance in CoD2 regardless of cost.

So I re-iterate, its not always about cost so stop trying to turn the discussion to it.

 

[zidane1strife]

Ill give my 2 cents:

I played this demo at compusa(desert area), and it looked pretty rough. Worse of the bunch, I'd say, didn't motivate to get much further than out of the jeep/vehicle. Thoroughly dissapointed, as I said at another board, HL2 on my 6600gt looked more impressive. Hopefully the final game looks exponentially better.

BTW, if these next-gen games require lots of config/setup on tvs just to look impressive, this is going to be a REAL problem with average joes/casual gamers. Especially considering the spread of lcds. Bad word of mouth could become a real problem.

 

[scooby_dooby]

pj - Who do you assume the PC gets the same versopn of COD2 as X360?

Do you have a link suggesting that, or is it just wishful thinking? King-Kong got a completely overhauled version, why wouldn't COD get some tweaks utilizing Xenos' SHM 9.0+ features?

IW didn't design this game for your buddies dual SLI setup, that represents a fraction of a percent of the PC market. Also, they were approached very early on to do a X360 exclusive launch title, why wouldn't they do a beefed up version for X360 and Xenos? Again, King-Kong did it.

If it's not at all CPU bound how come they dedicated months to multithreading their game engine across 3 cores? Just for the heck of it? How do you know the X360 version doesn't have some ramped up AI, or better smoke effects?

There's alot of unknowns, but I really don't see how you can jump to the conclusion that these are identical versions of the game with absolutely NO special features for the X360 version.

 

[Master-Mold]

No its not always about price. I know at least one person with a high end SLI PC setup already. In order to choose which system to buy CoD2 on he needs to know if the X360 will give a better performance than his PC. The cost of the 2 systems is totally irrelivant to that decsision, wouldn't you agree?

I plan to upgrade my own PC soon enough, I would do this wether COD2 existed or not, I will also be getting an X360 and therefore I too will need to make a decsision for which of my platforms to purchase CoD2 for. Would you care to explain to me why I would consider the cost of the hardware that I already own to make that decsision? Because beleive me im not planning to so if im doing womthing wrong, I think you should tell me.

Then off course there are people to whom £3000 is pocket change and if those people are graphics junkies like myself, they too will want to know which platform gives the better performance in CoD2 regardless of cost.

So I re-iterate, its not always about cost so stop trying to turn the discussion to it.

If you, or you know someone who has a high end SLI rig and they need to decide which platform they need to buy CoD2 on that doesnt say very much positive about the state of current PCs. Wouldnt you just buy it on your PC regardless? Otherwise you have a high end rig just sitting there rotting away that probably only has a shelf life of high end gaming for 12-18 months anyway. That is why it isnt relevant.

If you really need to compare a $299 system with a "high end PC" you already own it tells me even if you have extra income you need to learn how to better spend it. Why build a $2000+ rig that will be dated in the near future and not use it every time.

Its people like me who at one time bought high end PCs that need to be concerned with X360 perfomance more since my (once high end) middle of the road PC might get bested badly by a X360, and from what I have seen it does. Its people that already own a high end PC that jump in X360 conversations that need to defend their poor spending by belittling the X360.

It doesnt look very good when you realize the $2000 you may have just spent to be "Mr. Big Time PC" may have gone to waste or is rivaled by a console. Its the same thing on every PC forum-justification of a seemingly bad purchase.

 

[pjbliverpool]

pj - Who do you assume the PC gets the same versopn of COD2 as X360?

Do you have a link suggesting that, or is it just wishful thinking? King-Kong got a completely overhauled version, why wouldn't COD get some tweaks utilizing Xenos' SHM 9.0+ features?

IW didn't design this game for your buddies dual SLI setup, that represents a fraction of a percent of the PC market. Also, they were approached very early on to do a X360 exclusive launch title, why wouldn't they do a beefed up version for X360 and Xenos? Again, King-Kong did it.

If it's not at all CPU bound how come they dedicated months to multithreading their game engine across 3 cores? Just for the heck of it? How do you know the X360 version doesn't have some ramped up AI, or better smoke effects?

There's alot of unknowns, but I really don't see how you can jump to the conclusion that these are identical versions of the game with absolutely NO special features for the X360 version.

I here what your saying, but to be clear, im not assuming the PC version looks as good as the X360 version. Im hoping it does (regardless of resolution and framerate) but I would like to see some reliable comparisons or confirmed feature differences between the two versions before I will beleive it.

MOst accounts seem to put the two at roughly the same level, some say X360 is better, some say PC is better. We also know that CoD2 is built on a brandnew "next gen" graphics engine for the PC and that it doesn't share the same graphics engine as the current gen console version which is the case with King Kong.

No the devs arn't targeting SLI setups but there is no reason for them not to simply allow the games detail levels to be scaled up with the hardware if the power is available. If all the art assetts already exist for the X360 version, why not include them in the PC version for those with the power to use them?

Incidentally, IW have actually considered SLI setups, there is a setting in the graphics menu to optimise the game for SLI.

 

[pjbliverpool]

If you, or you know someone who has a high end SLI rig and they need to decide which platform they need to buy CoD2 on that doesnt say very much positive about the state of current PCs. Wouldnt you just buy it on your PC regardless? Otherwise you have a high end rig just sitting there rotting away that probably only has a shelf life of high end gaming for 12-18 months anyway. That is why it isnt relevant.

If you really need to compare a $299 system with a "high end PC" you already own it tells me even if you have extra income you need to learn how to better spend it. Why build a $2000+ rig that will be dated in the near future and not use it every time.

Its people like me who at one time bought high end PCs that need to be concerned with X360 perfomance more since my (once high end) middle of the road PC might get bested badly by a X360, and from what I have seen it does. Its people that already own a high end PC that jump in X360 conversations that need to defend their poor spending by belittling the X360.

It doesnt look very good when you realize the $2000 you may have just spent to be "Mr. Big Time PC" may have gone to waste or is rivaled by a console. Its the same thing on every PC forum-justification of a seemingly bad purchase.

I will upgrade my PC because I prefer playing games on the PC. I prefer the cutsomisablity, the controls, the fact that you can do a lot more than just game on it and the superior image quality. So my PC is getting upgraded, no matter how many excuses you want to give me as to why thats a bad idea.

Now given that I will also have an X360 (mainly for the console centric exclusive games it has) it makes sense for me to weigh up which platform a particular game will be better on. Yes my decision will be based on those factors above but it will also be based on graphics and performance. I certainly wouldn't see it as a "failiure" of my PC if I decided to get the X360 version of CoD2 because I know there are plently of other games that I will be getting on the PC which will justify my purchase (otherwise why would I have bought it in the first place?)

The person I know with the GTX SLI system purchased it a good while back and so has reaped the benefit of it for a long time before the X360 launched. Yes there will be a couple of games that look better on the X360 because of updated engines i.e. king kong (although I doubt any will perform better) but I doubt he's losing any sleep over it. Its not like his top of the range PC suddenly became useless just because King Kong looks better on a $300 console.

Personally I think now is a very bad time to upgrade your PC because of the X360. Clearly your only going to be able to buy hardware thats comparable to that in the X360 and your going to pay a lot more for it. And by the time games start coming to PC which look clearly better than those on the X360, that hardware will no longer be the best. it certainly doesn't invalidate comparisons of that hardware to whats in the X360 though, especially for people who have already purchased it, or simply don't like using consoles, or have enough money to make a high end PC purchase seem insignificant.

For myself, I will be waiting until the R600/G80 generation to upgrade at which time I will get a lower high end card for roughly the same price as the X360. Yes thats just a GPU vs a whole console but it should exceed the X360 on both features and performance and so allow me to continue playing games on my preferred platform at a sensible cost for the next 3 years. Until then I will just have to accept the fact that for about 7-8 months, my PC will be significantly slower than my games console. Thats something I don't mind since I know it will be faster for the other 3-4 years of the consoles lifespan.

 

[SynapticSignal]

stop the ******'ism

I think that there're a lot of liers, that blame the x360 for their personal useless matters

so WHO can say which version is the more detailed and faster?

"The first thing to note is that even when the console game is running side
by side with a top of the range PC version, outputting in as high-resolution
as it can muster, the 360 version has the edge visually. Perhaps this will
change as graphics cards evolve, but for now, the console game runs more
smoothly, has far quicker load times, and looks generally better than its
poor home computer cousin. This means that visually, Call of Duty 2 is
absolutely jaw dropping, especially when it's played on a high definition
Widescreen TV"

http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=639836


please stop saying BS
60 rocksolid FPS means that the min fps was 60
is retard, comparing a 55 mid value with a 60 min value, that's a monster difference
that I can say

in 1280x1024 (closest to 720p) aa4x
the x1800xt have a min fps of 29 fps (half of x360)
7800gtx have 19 fps (1/3 of x360)

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/r520reviewxvxv/COD2.htm

 

[groper]

please stop saying BS
60 rocksolid FPS means that the min fps was 60

Yes but who can confirm this 60 rocksolid FPS ?
There is not any published test about this.

 

[Nicked]

60 rocksolid FPS means that the min fps was 60
is retard, comparing a 55 mid value with a 60 min value, that's a monster difference
that I can say

in 1280x1024 (closest to 720p) aa4x
the x1800xt have a min fps of 29 fps (half of x360)
7800gtx have 19 fps (1/3 of x360)

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/r520reviewxvxv/COD2.htm

FWIW, the X360 version does have noticeable slowdown, during explosions and heavy-action sequences. Also the X360's AA is not comparable to a PC-cards AA (and most launch titles are only 2xAA on X360, not sure on CoD), and it is already established that 1280x1024 is FAR more taxing than 720p. Your comparisons are bunk.

This whole thread is pointless. The X360 version generally performs better because its a closed system. Its been developed with its specs in mind, whereas the PC version has to cater to a wide variety of configurations. The X360 is a powerful console, and like all new consoles, it should be comparable to current highend PCs.

 

[Tap In]

FWIW, the X360 version does have noticeable slowdown, during explosions and heavy-action sequences... ..

maybe the DEMO on the kiosks but evidently the reviewer referred to earlier had a near completed build.... two different animals perhaps (with regard to slow down or not)

this whole thread is pointless because no one here has played the final game and no one wants to accept a reviewers perception.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I think that there're a lot of liers, that blame the x360 for their personal useless matters

so WHO can say which version is the more detailed and faster?

"The first thing to note is that even when the console game is running side
by side with a top of the range PC version, outputting in as high-resolution
as it can muster, the 360 version has the edge visually. Perhaps this will
change as graphics cards evolve, but for now, the console game runs more
smoothly, has far quicker load times, and looks generally better than its
poor home computer cousin. This means that visually, Call of Duty 2 is
absolutely jaw dropping, especially when it's played on a high definition
Widescreen TV"

http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=639836


please stop saying BS
60 rocksolid FPS means that the min fps was 60
is retard, comparing a 55 mid value with a 60 min value, that's a monster difference
that I can say

in 1280x1024 (closest to 720p) aa4x
the x1800xt have a min fps of 29 fps (half of x360)
7800gtx have 19 fps (1/3 of x360)

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/r520reviewxvxv/COD2.htm

I challenge you to prove CoD2 on the X360 never falls below 60fps.