COD2 benches..a comparison point?

[one]

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)

FWIW

720p = 1280x720 = 921,600
1024x768 = 786,432 = 720p * 0.85
1280x1024 = 1,310,720 = 720p * 1.42

So, closest to 720p is not 1280x1024. Does it have 4xFSAA BTW? At least apparently it doesn't have AF as some guys already reported in this forum.

Also check out this benchmark.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1867128,00.asp

 

[scooby_dooby]

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.

Funny how you prefer to believe a random forum poster who walked into walmart and played a DEMO, over a reputable gaming site. Why?

Numerous sites such as IGN, 1UP and Total Games all say this game has absolutely no slowdown and actually gush over the framerate. And you ignore that why?

 

[Fox5]

FWIW

720p = 1280x720 = 921,600
1024x768 = 786,432 = 720p * 0.85
1280x1024 = 1,310,720 = 720p * 1.42

So, closest to 720p is not 1280x1024. Does it have 4xFSAA BTW?

You know, 1280x960 and 1280x768 are both valid pc resolutions.

 

[one]

You know, 1280x960 and 1280x768 are both valid pc resolutions.

Yes, but benchmark tests with those res are not often available on the net

EDIT: For fun's sake
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/ati_radeon_x1800_x1600preview/10.html

 

[Nicked]

Funny how you prefer to believe a random forum poster who walked into walmart and played a DEMO, over a reputable gaming site. Why?

Numerous sites such as IGN, 1UP and Total Games all say this game has absolutely no slowdown and actually gush over the framerate. And you ignore that why?

Why wouldn't I? Bigger XFans than you (shocking, I know) are amongst those who collaborate that there is indeed slowdown. Perhaps I don't quite believe Total Games, aka XBMUK.
I just took a quick trip to IGN, guess, what, their latest preview, over a month old, as old or older than the demo itself, makes no mention of the framerate apart from saying that its a solid 30FPS in multiplayer.
EGMs preview (at 1up), gave no mention to the framerate whatsoever.
1ups preview (over a month old), however, gave us some solid info. They never considered 30FPS, but wouldn't tell them what speed it is running at. My own conclusion, its not 60FPS, because thats a bullet-point you'd sell to the media.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Maybe you should watch the 1UUP round table where CHE and the editor from IGN both agree their favourite feature of COD2 is the absolutle LACK of slowdown.

And that was about 2 weeks ago.
http://360countdown.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3144973&did=1

"everything moves like 60fps, super fast"

"and it doesn't skip a beat - no slowdown at all"

edit - it's actually 3 1up editors, no IGN guy

 

[Tap In]

Maybe you should watch the 1UUP round table where CHE and the editor from IGN both agree their favourite feature of COD2 is the absolutle LACK of slowdown.

And that was about 2 weeks ago.
http://360countdown.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3144973&did=1

"everything moves like 60fps, super fast"

"and it doesn't skip a beat - no slowdown at all"

edit - it's actually 3 1up editors, no IGN guy

Edit: I retracted an unnecessary comment

 

[pjbliverpool]

Maybe you should watch the 1UUP round table where CHE and the editor from IGN both agree their favourite feature of COD2 is the absolutle LACK of slowdown.

And that was about 2 weeks ago.
http://360countdown.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3144973&did=1

"everything moves like 60fps, super fast"

"and it doesn't skip a beat - no slowdown at all"

edit - it's actually 3 1up editors, no IGN guy

Tell me, can you see slow down in a framerate that fluctuates between 35fps and 55 fps? No? So why do you assume its true when some guy on a website claims "the game runs at 60fps because it looks smooth to me"?

 

[Falkster]

Tell me, can you see slow down in a framerate that fluctuates between 35fps and 55 fps? No? So why do you assume its true when some guy on a website claims "the game runs at 60fps because it looks smooth to me"?

To me, the definition of slow down really only comes into play when you can actually notice the slow down, regardless of the actual frame rate. I'm not sure of the required drop in frame rate to actually notice slow down, but the general concensus amongst reviewers is that the frame rate doesn't drop to the extent where there is any visual slow down unlike (apparently) the PC version running on a "typical" setup. Meh, just my $0.02, for what it's worth.

 

[pjbliverpool]

To me, the definition of slow down really only comes into play when you can actually notice the slow down, regardless of the actual frame rate. I'm not sure of the required drop in frame rate to actually notice slow down, but the general concensus amongst reviewers is that the frame rate doesn't drop to the extent where there is any visual slow down unlike (apparently) the PC version running on a "typical" setup. Meh, just my $0.02, for what it's worth.

Your absolutely correct. The game could be regularly dipping to 35 fps and maintainig an average of 45fps and the average reviewer wouldn't be able to tell the difference between that and a fixed 60fps.

Its true that CoD2 probably slows down to noticible levels on a 6800U PC when the res is set at 1600x1200/4xFSAA/8xAF but then the same is true of Voodoo 2 powered PC running Quake 2. Does that mean that all PC's are less powerful than a PS1? No its all relative to the game, the graphics and the true framerate. Without a common frame of referance, all comparisons are meaningless.

 

[Fox5]

Tell me, can you see slow down in a framerate that fluctuates between 35fps and 55 fps? No? So why do you assume its true when some guy on a website claims "the game runs at 60fps because it looks smooth to me"?

I can tell the difference. Between 50 to 60 is kind of hard, but once it drops below 50 it becomes noticably jerkier, then the next drop is about below 25, then below about 15, and I'd say the next below about 5-7.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Tell me, can you see slow down in a framerate that fluctuates between 35fps and 55 fps? No? So why do you assume its true when some guy on a website claims "the game runs at 60fps because it looks smooth to me"?

This "guy on a website" is the PC Editor for 1UP.com. One of the biggest online gaming sites in the world probably? Presumably he does nothing but sit around and play/review PC games all day every day.

And I was never offering that as proof of 60FPS. Just as evidence that there are no noticeable slowdowns in the game, and wondering why Nicked would prefer to ignore independant knowledgeable reviews and instead believe anonymous posters claiming slowdown.

 

[kyleb]

Heh, I saw one of the guys always on G4 claiming no slowdowns for Far Cry Insticts and I can tell you that is far from the truth, "knowledgeable reviews" can be rather hard to come by. That said, the CoD2 demo runs very well on the 360 from what I saw, it looked a like it was dipping into the 30s or so with really heavy smoke and lots of action but that is still well better than what my x800xt-pe and 2.34ghz A64 pulls off. Unfortunatly I do think it looks better on my PC running 856x480 with x4aa than on the Xbox demo which clearly had no AA and couldn't have been rendered any higher than 1064x600. I'm also worried about some of the more strenuous levels though as I played though the game on the PC and the demo level was far from the most demanding.

 

[pakotlar]

Why quibble over something so completely un-testable. One person says that it runs rock solid 60fps and 4xAA, based on a recent review. The other says it runs at a choppy 30 with no AA/AF and low-res textures, based on the recent demo. NEITHER party's can back up their claims with irrefutable evidence of final code. Wait a week and see. Or is arguing the point here?

 

[SynapticSignal]

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

this forums seems full of x360 haters

"
Proudly boasting an incredibly solid 60 frames per second, along with all the usual technical refinements that subtly contribute towards making the game as slick as possible (such as anti-aliasing and 720p output), Call of Duty 2 plays like a dream - never skipping to load in the enormous levels, never stuttering during moments of intense combat, and never faltering when all you can see is fire, bullets and blood. Put simply, the look of Call of Duty 2 is flawless.
"

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


and for the others, STOP comparing PC mid fps with the min 60 FPS of x360 version
this is a very stupid thing!



and to close the bad mouths, listen Grant Collier, the president of INFINITY WARD (sorry, this is in italian, hope that some of you can understand, I'll translate for the others)

"Ci sono alcune differenze importanti tra la versione PC e quella XBOX360 di
Call Of Duty 2.
Call Of Duty 2 usa tutti e tre i processori di XBOX360 uno per la
Intelligenza Artificiale,uno per la fisica e gli effetti speciali,e infine
uno per gestire tutto il codice del gioco,il chip grafico di XBOX360 non e'
solo UNA ma DUE generazioni avanti rispetto al meglio che ce' in
circolazione per PC, come conseguenza abbiamo raggiunto una fluidita'
nettamente maggiore su XBOX360 rispetto al PC con 60 Fotogrammi Al Secondo
STABILI."

http://www.eroscapecchi.com/forum/128bit/Filmatocod2xbox360.wmv

"there are some important differences between version PC and that XBOX360 of Call Of Duty 2. Call Of Duty 2 uses all and the three processors of XBOX360, one for the Artificial intelligence, one for physics and the special effects, and finally one in order to manage all the code of the game, chip graphical of XBOX360 is not only one, but TWO generations ahead regarding the best that is in circulation for PC, as consequence we have caught up one clearly great smoother on XBOX360 regarding the PC with 60 STABLE Frames per Second.

OK?


[edited to make some words in 'bold', I hope that the thing is clear and simple, now]

 

[!eVo!-X Ant UK]

So the game has no VISIBLE slowdown woohoo.

really man i really need to try and get the editors to lend me there frame rate counter as it seems its super acurate.

 

[SynapticSignal]

So the game has no VISIBLE slowdown woohoo.

really man i really need to try and get the editors to lend me there frame rate counter as it seems its super acurate.

haters never stop

when a game that run at 60fps with a vsync, a little drops in frames per second cause the huge drop visually 60-30 fps
and this is CLEARLY VISIBLE.

some of you don't (want to) believe to trusted reviewers, president of infinity wards..
so who we can ask for, the pope?

 

[Hardknock]

Some people just refuse to believe anything positive about Xbox 360. I'll take the developer's word and reviewers' word over some random poster on a message board, but that's just me.

There are rock-solid 60fps games this gen(Ninja Gaiden and DOA:U to name a few), why is it so unbelievable for the 360 to attain this??

 

[Apoc]

Your absolutely correct. The game could be regularly dipping to 35 fps and maintainig an average of 45fps and the average reviewer wouldn't be able to tell the difference between that and a fixed 60fps.

There is no 35 or 45 in console games. They are v-synced so it's 30 or 60 fps. If you have a dip to 55 fps you'll get 30 fps, not 55 fps.

 

[SynapticSignal]

There is no 35 or 45 in console games. They are v-synced so it's 30 or 60 fps. If you have a dip to 55 fps you'll get 30 fps, not 55 fps.

of course.
this is why PGR3 is 30 locked FPS, when the developer says that the framerate falls between 30 and 60 fps (some says 45-50), but vsynced it is as it is, 30 locked (no min fps under this, no max allowed by vsync)