The Gaming Benchmarks Thread

[henrikrox]

Damn nice quality, TMraven, could you do me a favour, and post a picture of the following.

Native res, everything on high (not ultra) - With fraps showing fps. You can just take a picture of workers mining and maybe som structers

Now go to options and set ultra

and take the same picture of the base, i wont to see how big of a difference ultra is to high, and what it does to the fps.

If you could do that i would be super glad

 

[TMRaven]

So i reckon 1080p with ultra settings is the way to go?

No, it is not. You sacrifice too much visual quality for a minimal fps gain. LCDs should usually be set at native resolution when sitting close to the screen itself. The thing you'd most likely want to do would be to set everything at ultra at native resolution, but keep shaders down to high-- which would in turn set post-processing down to medium. Here are come comparisons:

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-17-31-62.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-27-51-60.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (31fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-32-29-47.jpg

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-18-23-20.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-29-12-96.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (30fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-31-02-34.jpg

For getting a good sense of how resolution affects visual quality, you'd probably wanna set each picture as a desktop wallpaper, and alternate between the two, to see how blurry it is.

Damn nice quality, TMraven, could you do me a favour, and post a picture of the following.

Native res, everything on high (not ultra) - With fraps showing fps. You can just take a picture of workers mining and maybe som structers

Now go to options and set ultra

and take the same picture of the base, i wont to see how big of a difference ultra is to high, and what it does to the fps.

If you could do that i would be super glad

I can try. Setting everything to high probably won't hurt that much at all, altho I do recommend keeping texture on ultra, as texture is what really makes a game look crisp.

 

[henrikrox]

No, it is not. You sacrifice too much visual quality for a minimal fps gain. LCDs should usually be set at native resolution when sitting close to the screen itself. The thing you'd most likely want to do would be to set everything at ultra at native resolution, but keep shaders down to high-- which would in turn set post-processing down to medium. Here are come comparisons:

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-17-31-62.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-27-51-60.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (31fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-27-51-60.jpg

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-18-23-20.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-29-12-96.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (30fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-31-02-34.jpg

For getting a good sense of how resolution affects visual quality, you'd probably wanna set each picture as a desktop wallpaper, and alternate between the two, to see how blurry it is.



I can try. Setting everything to high probably won't hurt that much at all, altho I do recommend keeping texture on ultra, as texture is what really makes a game look crisp.

Would be sweet if you did, just finding out how big difference high is to ultra, and what it does to the fps.

 

[diegobgr]

Anyone has the 5670 model?

It looks a good one to play at 1080p in the 21,5", but I will like to see some benchs.

I like games like Fallout 3, Dragon Age, Mass Effect...

 

[spiffy05]

Anyone has the 5670 model?

It looks a good one to play at 1080p in the 21,5", but I will like to see some benchs.

That's the model I ordered, so I'm looking forward to benchmarks if you have them!

 

[diegobgr]

I think that 5670 at 1920x1080 will perform more or less the same than a 5750 at 2560x1440.

More or less.

 

[henrikrox]

I think that 5670 at 1920x1080 will perform more or less the same than a 5750 at 2560x1440.

More or less.

Then i think you are sadly mistaken, the step from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 isnt huge. And you wont be pulling ultra on 1920x1080 on the 5670. Its just marginal better then previous generation 4670, which did medium at okay frame rates.

You will not see ultra on a 5670, due to inferior gpu and inferior cpu compared to the quad cores / 5750

 

[blinkin182]

Well, as far as question one goes, most games do not even have quad core support yet, so I do not see hyper-threading being used in most games for some time to come. Even two years down the road, I'm not so sure they'll even bother with it.

Does Crysis 2 even support HT?

Good question.

I was looking for a list of applications that take advantage of Multiple-Cores (and thus Hyper-threading) but couldn't find any.

It would be pretty cool to see in which applications we can see a multi-core/hyper-threading advantage.

Anyone know?

 

[axma]

Dragon Age, GTA 4, Ghostbusters, RE5 and Red Faction Guerrilla are a few examples of games that do effectively use more than 2 cores.
The list will continue growing in the next years.

Dragon Age benchmarks:
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...rks-75-percent-boost-for-quad-cores/Practice/


[EDIT] May be these lists will interest you:
http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=windows_quad_core_applications
http://www.grandtheftpc.com/2010/03/list-of-quad-core-optimized-games.html

[EDIT 2] Sorry u were talking about hexacore (HyperThreading), not about quadcore. In this case only GTA 4 currently use it.

 

[byron_hinson]

Dragon Age, GTA 4, Ghostbusters, RE5 and Red Faction Guerrilla are a few examples of games that do effectively use more than 2 cores.
The list will continue growing in the next years.

Dragon Age benchmarks:
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...rks-75-percent-boost-for-quad-cores/Practice/


[EDIT] May be these lists will interest you:
http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=windows_quad_core_applications
http://www.grandtheftpc.com/2010/03/list-of-quad-core-optimized-games.html

[EDIT 2] Sorry u were talking about hexacore (HyperThreading), not about quadcore. In this case only GTA 4 currently use it.

Might be one reason why Dragon Age works perfectly even in native res with everything on full on the 27" i5 iMac 2010 Edition!

 

[byron_hinson]

No, it is not. You sacrifice too much visual quality for a minimal fps gain. LCDs should usually be set at native resolution when sitting close to the screen itself. The thing you'd most likely want to do would be to set everything at ultra at native resolution, but keep shaders down to high-- which would in turn set post-processing down to medium. Here are come comparisons:

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-17-31-62.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-27-51-60.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (31fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-32-29-47.jpg

All ultra and native resolution (26fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-00-18-23-20.jpg
All ultra and 1920x1080p resolution (34fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-29-12-96.jpg
All ultra and native resolution, spare shaders to high (30fps):http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/twisted_metal_2/SC2-2010-08-03-08-31-02-34.jpg

For getting a good sense of how resolution affects visual quality, you'd probably wanna set each picture as a desktop wallpaper, and alternate between the two, to see how blurry it is.



I can try. Setting everything to high probably won't hurt that much at all, altho I do recommend keeping texture on ultra, as texture is what really makes a game look crisp.

How are you finding Starcraft 2 in Windowed mode - I'm running it this way on the new 27" i5 and find it the best way to play it, I can play it in ultra settings above 30fps in a window around the side of 1920x1080. Means you get it to look much better than in 1080p full screen mode that makes it look like vaseline has been smothered over the screen!

 

[TMRaven]

For a 3-5fps performance difference over all ultra at native resolution with shaders down to high, I'm personally not going to run it in windowed mode.

It may sound silly to users who have the 21.5 inch screens, but I find 1920x1080p in windowed mode to be rather small on the 27 inch screen!

 

[byron_hinson]

For a 3-5fps performance difference over all ultra at native resolution with shaders down to high, I'm personally not going to run it in windowed mode.

It may sound silly to users who have the 21.5 inch screens, but I find 1920x1080p in windowed mode to be rather small on the 27 inch screen!

Guess its just me - but anything below 30fps jerking along makes me feel sick if playing. I agree though it does always look small on a 27" even when it isn't really

 

[TMRaven]

Damn nice quality, TMraven, could you do me a favour, and post a picture of the following.

Native res, everything on high (not ultra) - With fraps showing fps. You can just take a picture of workers mining and maybe som structers

Now go to options and set ultra

and take the same picture of the base, i wont to see how big of a difference ultra is to high, and what it does to the fps.

If you could do that i would be super glad

I ran a very specific fraps benchmarking test over one of my 1v1 replays against an AI using my player cam, so each benchmark will utilize the exact same frames. My results:

native resolution with all settings to ultra, except shaders to high: 46fps average
native resolution with all settings set to ultra, except shaders, lighting, shadows and terrain set to hig: 47fps average

Not really worth it.

All settings to ultra except for shaders to high seems to be the sweet spot.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Yes!

this is a VERY interesting and important topic, please if someone finds out how to get this drivers squared away share it with us please..

I'm getting a refurb iMac 27 i7 2.8 and would love to bump its performance if it is possible for better gaming performance..

I also want to see this as well and would be curious if the improved drivers provide improved results using GlView which is a OpenGL benchmarker I use to determine performance on a number of platforms.

Anyone get this going? I'm seriously wanting that update.

 

[thehalokid]

TM raven!

you mentioned you overclocked ur 4850m, in your personal opinion do you thinks it worth overclocking the gpu at all?
ive read some posts where folks seem to disagree that that the gains are marginal at least, if at all!

 

[TMRaven]

20% fps boost for 20% clock increase.

 

[Dyne]

20% fps boost for 20% clock increase.

What did you increase your clocks to so far, and how has that affected your core temps?

 

[aliensporebomb]

Wondering...

I wonder if the framerate increase from overclocking would equal the framerate increase you would get with these new drivers?

I'm surprised this new driver update isn't front page news here - there are a lot of people with ATI driven iMac computers who could benefit from this.

 

[dexthageek]

I ran a very specific fraps benchmarking test over one of my 1v1 replays against an AI using my player cam, so each benchmark will utilize the exact same frames. My results:

native resolution with all settings to ultra, except shaders to high: 46fps average
native resolution with all settings set to ultra, except shaders, lighting, shadows and terrain set to hig: 47fps average

Not really worth it.

All settings to ultra except for shaders to high seems to be the sweet spot.

I assume you are running in Windows?
In OSX, I am only getting over 40FPS (Single Player) when running 1080p and medium for a number of settings
I am afraid to even set it to Ultra in OSX, it might blow up.

I hope Apple releases a driver update soon. Not sure why they released it for 2010 but not 2009.

 

[aliensporebomb]

I assume you are running in Windows?
In OSX, I am only getting over 40FPS (Single Player) when running 1080p and medium for a number of settings
I am afraid to even set it to Ultra in OSX, it might blow up.

I hope Apple releases a driver update soon. Not sure why they released it for 2010 but not 2009.

Because the users of those machines paid their money THIS MONTH rather than LAST MONTH (grumble ).

Pacifist eh? I might have to try this.

 

[Yamcha]

You gotta be kidding, Crysis is an amazing game

 

[Dyne]

You gotta be kidding, Crysis is an amazing game

Amazingly dull.

 

[TMRaven]

I wonder if the framerate increase from overclocking would equal the framerate increase you would get with these new drivers?

I'm surprised this new driver update isn't front page news here - there are a lot of people with ATI driven iMac computers who could benefit from this.

Apples to oranges. Overclocking in windows gets you from point B to C. Getting up-to-date drivers in osx takes you from point A to B. (C being the best and A being the worst)

 

[GyroFX]

Apples to oranges. Overclocking in windows gets you from point B to C. Getting up-to-date drivers in osx takes you from point A to B. (C being the best and A being the worst)

wonder how stable it would be to OC on the windows side, considering the gpu gets kinda hot already running natively in OSX.