Far Cry benchmark

[OWA]

BenchEmAll Results using its default demo with max settings and then custom max settings so AA and AF were applied.

6800GT no AA/AF, 2xAA/4xAF, 4xAA/8xAF | X800 Pro 2xAA/4xAF, 4xAA/8xAF Results

I just created a chart since it was easier to compare (did this for something else).

[Sazar]

nice

cpu limitations all the way to 12x10 res...

what benchmark is that btw? ie what level

[OWA]

Oh, that was BenchEmAll using its default demo. I guess I should note that huh. I forgot my chart doesn't have all the details.

Edit: Just wish I had your level of CPU. I think that would help quite a bit. I'm currently looking into upgrading.

[-=DVS=-]

Any idea how to run this benchmark with SM30 optimizations enable ?

Far Cry
Using Max settings.
Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo
640x480
run# 0: Average FPS: 71.83
800x600
run# 0: Average FPS: 73.98
1024x768
run# 0: Average FPS: 75.01
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 73.13
1600x1200
run# 0: Average FPS: 65.13

Far Cry

Using Min settings.
Map: Fort Demo: BenchemallDefaultDemo
640x480
run# 0: Average FPS: 114.79
800x600
run# 0: Average FPS: 115.23
1024x768
run# 0: Average FPS: 114.83
1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 113.94
1600x1200
run# 0: Average FPS: 114.44

[therapture]

DVS....is the A64 3200+ so much faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon Mobile, that it would account for 30fps difference on benchemall's default maximum detail runs????

I mean my Mobile chip is at 2.4ghz (@3400+) and I only get:



1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 45.98
run# 1: Average FPS: 46.85



I compared my scores with several other P4 rigs in the 3.1ghz range, and a bunch of other XP's and it seems close...I just expected more from this cpu considering I had been on Intel P4's @3ghz for a while before I got this...

[Blacklash]

Originally Posted by therapture

DVS....is the A64 3200+ so much faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon Mobile, that it would account for 30fps difference on benchemall's default maximum detail runs????

I mean my Mobile chip is at 2.4ghz (@3400+) and I only get:



1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 45.98
run# 1: Average FPS: 46.85



I compared my scores with several other P4 rigs in the 3.1ghz range, and a bunch of other XP's and it seems close...I just expected more from this cpu considering I had been on Intel P4's @3ghz for a while before I got this...

It's much easier to understand scores if you know both the processor OC AND the graphics card OC. For instance if your card tops out at 415/1.19 like mine, or less, and then say suddenly we could clock 450/1.3 like JakUp's ultra, you'd see a great increase especially 1280 and up, certainly at 1600.

A note on SM3.0 for those of you that didn't try it, In order to use it with the 1.2 patch I had to start the game and enter r_SM30PATH 1, then I would get a prompt at the top of the screen telling me it was on. It only would stay on for a gaming session. Each time I started I had to enable it again via the same command. Bench'emall would not be running with SM3.0, it starts Far Cry directly from my exe in my folder. So I am saying I seriously doubt anyone was receiving a benefit here from SM3.0 in this specific bench.

I removed the 1.2 patch do to the crappy shadows edges and issues with FSAA. I am back to using the 'r300' path as some call it, via the d3d(32) wrapper by Tommti systems.

If you really want a raw measure of ram/cpu speed try a SuperPi1M bench. I turn in 36secs there, precisely two secs behind an AMD FX-53 which does 34.

[Sazar]

mal are you talking about stock score for pi or oc'd?

I have a hard time believing you are getting 36 seconds with a canterwood @ 3.9ghz... sounds a little high...

wrt "therapture"

not sure if the cpu itself will account for the performance differnce but keep in mind we (dazz and myself) are both running a higher fsb which DOES account for some of the difference..

wrt my old 3.0c i do notice a nice smoothness in my games now (overall fps has increased...)

nice oc btw..

[therapture]

Originally Posted by betterdan

Using 61.76 drivers WITHOUT enabling any 3.0 support. No AA or AF, Max settings.

Resolution: 1280×1024
Maximum quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Pier, demo: 1.tmd

Score = 47.17 FPS

...

Resolution: 1280×1024
Maximum quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Steam, demo: hocsteam.tmd

Score = 40.56 FPS

...

Resolution: 1280×1024
Maximum quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Regulator, demo: tr1-regulator.tmd

Score = 35.40 FPS

...

Resolution: 1280×1024
Maximum quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Volcano, demo: hocvolcano.tmd

Score = 67.62 FPS

...

Resolution: 1280×1024
Maximum quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Research, demo: 3dnews001.tmd

Score = 41.83 FPS

I am actually playing the game at 1280x1024 4xAA and 4xAF everything maxed and it runs pretty damn smooth. I like it

That last demo is kind of weird. It runs faster as **** but shows a small fps. Weird.

Wow, our scores are so close as to be within the range of normal deviation. Even the ram speed is about the same...I think Far Cry seems to gain fps with overall bus speed, plus the A64 cpu's are jamming...

[therapture]

Originally Posted by Sazar

wrt "therapture"

not sure if the cpu itself will account for the performance differnce but keep in mind we (dazz and myself) are both running a higher fsb which DOES account for some of the difference..



nice oc btw..

It seems a higher fsb increase performance a fair amount in this game, it must be cpu intensive, needing all the throughout it can get to process the elements of the game, physics, video rendering, sound, AI, etc.


I am going A64 soon...

[Sazar]

wait for h2 '04... dual cores coming and intel has a coupla new aces up their sleeve too

[therapture]

Originally Posted by Malficar

If you really want a raw measure of ram/cpu speed try a SuperPi1M bench. I turn in 36secs there, precisely two secs behind an AMD FX-53 which does 34.

I get....43 secs using 1M.....

[-=DVS=-]

Originally Posted by therapture

DVS....is the A64 3200+ so much faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon Mobile, that it would account for 30fps difference on benchemall's default maximum detail runs????

I mean my Mobile chip is at 2.4ghz (@3400+) and I only get:



1280x1024
run# 0: Average FPS: 45.98
run# 1: Average FPS: 46.85



I compared my scores with several other P4 rigs in the 3.1ghz range, and a bunch of other XP's and it seems close...I just expected more from this cpu considering I had been on Intel P4's @3ghz for a while before I got this...

Oops forgot to update my signature , i have Athlon 64 3700+ it runs at 2.4 Ghz , and yes clock for clock athlon 64 is realy fast oh and its all stock absolutely nothing overcloaked