[H] Core 2 Gaming Benchmarks

Discussion in 'PC Hardware, Software and Displays' started by Skrying, Jul 14, 2006.

  1. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,116
    Likes Received:
    213
    Location:
    Uffda-land
  2. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    I would highly suggest that Kyle just simply opt out of actually speaking or writing. Seriously, the guy can't even help write something without being himself on a platform and believing he is the savior of benchmarking (wait...).

    I also had a nice giggle with the term "lagging" used in regards to offline play, now that must be one heck of a slow net connection.
     
  3. RobertR1

    RobertR1 Pro
    Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    574
    Yep, real world gaming is all about 30inch widescreen with Sli'd 8800GTX's.
     
    #123 RobertR1, Jan 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2007
    digitalwanderer likes this.
  4. cam

    cam
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    U.K.
    I don’t understand, if you’re comparing like for like why run certain games on a slightly higher setting for one platform and not the other.

    Surely if one system bottlenecks at certain level and the other one doesn’t, you use the level the one bottlenecks at and apply it to both, or am I missing some basic testing fundamentals?
     
  5. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    HardOCP does that. They determine if a card can handle certain settings and then give the FPS results. So if they feel a 8800GTX can handle full settings plus 4xAA but the X1950XTX can only do full settings with no AA then they'll give the results for those settings and simply not test the same results on each card.
     
  6. pjbliverpool

    pjbliverpool B3D Scallywag
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,583
    Likes Received:
    703
    Location:
    Guess...
    I don't get why they run some tests with MSAA on the Intel and not on the AMD. Surely whether you have MSAA turned on or not should have no baring on CPU performance!

    Also, is it just me or does the suggestion that 768 MB of graphics memory not being enough for Oblivion just seem wrong? Almost seems like a plug for "something else" which may be coming along soon.
     
  7. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    Its a CPU vs CPU article, they are trying to suggest that not being able to run MSAA would be the CPU holding you back with all other things equal.
     
  8. pjbliverpool

    pjbliverpool B3D Scallywag
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,583
    Likes Received:
    703
    Location:
    Guess...
    Yes but MSAA performance is 100% GPU reliant as far as im aware so a different powered CPU should make no difference to it at all. In fact if anything you should be turning on MSAA with the slower CPU since its more "free" in that case as the game is already CPU bound, thus you want to increase the GPU's work load to bring it in line.
     
  9. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    I like how the article talks about feeling things, feeling the framerate is lower, feeling like more videoram is needed (my fav).
    Truthyness galore!
     
  10. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,844
    Likes Received:
    178
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Well, if everything is working as it should, then some frames should be GPU-limited, and others CPU-limited. Thus, when you turn up GPU-bound things like MSAA, you will be lowering your framerate on GPU-limited frames, which in turn lowers the average framerate. If the benchmarker is only paying attention to the average, he/she is likely to conclude that you want lower graphics settings on a system with a slower CPU.

    This is, as you mention, largely nonsense because doing this probably isn't going to have much impact on your minimum framerate, but will rather more affect the maximum, and will thus not be as noticed.
     
  11. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    I know this.

    I was pointing out why HardOCP does it. Did I say it makes sense? No, because it doesn't, its just part of the program for HardOCP...
     
  12. poopypoo

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    1,026
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I'm fairly certain that they still test the games at each resolution and IQ setting, but the trouble is that ofc ourse they don't publish any but the results they find most meaningful -- leaving you without the ability to make any informed decisions for yourself. It' a shame, since their whole max/min performance graph approach was truly revolutionary and great -- then they ruined it with this subjective garbage. Ah well. (ps Skyring I know you already knew this -- just trying to clarify in case anyone missed the obvious. I'm prob just resurrecting a dead horse -- if so, sorry...) ;)
     
  13. ANova

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    10
    The guy obviously doesn't (or won't) grasp the concept of hardware specific bottlenecks and how it relates to overall performance.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...