| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 113290 | 2010-10-13 00:13:00 | Gmaing - hardware Performance | pctek (84) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1144161 | 2010-10-13 00:13:00 | . tomshardware . com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2738-16 . html" target="_blank">www . tomshardware . com Transitions to 65, and then 45 nm allowed processor manufacturers and overclockers to accelerate clock frequencies, making 3 . 5 GHz a breeze with most CPUs . But the newer DirectX 10 and 11 games don't really need this speed . This change snuck up on us, making CPU overclocking for 3D games rather meaningless at the mainstream level . Of the 20 games tested in this article, only 10 respond at all to CPU overclocking when we used a GeForce GTX 460 graphics card . Seven of them show only small reactions . Just three show a small frame rate increase . Now, this situation might be completely different at lower resolutions, but the Radeon HD 5800-class monitors, the GeForce GTX 460, and HD resolution LCD monitors are slowly becoming standard gaming equipment . The following table provides an overview of all the test results so that you can check whether your PC is ready for the tested games or if you need to upgrade something . Giving a straight answer regarding the amount of graphics memory you need is difficult . The games adapt . If less memory is available, less is often used . The feeling we get is that the 768 MB of our Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 graphics card is already starting to feel somewhat insufficient, -------------- Not to mention the artile on Spanning monitors - which from what it said is a great idea and one that doesn't work practically yet . |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1144162 | 2010-10-13 00:28:00 | It seems to me that game developers like making games for future hardware, and not the mainstream stuff that most people use. Sure theres a few people out there who have the latest and fastest everything, but I would guess that the average Joe can't afford that sort of setup. I have got into the habit of buying 2yo+ games, they find their way into the bargain bin and run sweet on my new pc which isn't any thing super-flash :) Currently playing Grid at 80 - 130fps, could barely get 30 out of my old pc which wasn't a slug either.. |
SoniKalien (792) | ||
| 1144163 | 2010-10-13 02:01:00 | Big thread on it at Anands....... forums.anandtech.com |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 1144164 | 2010-10-13 02:07:00 | Sweet, so I get to keep my i7 920 for longer now! | qazwsxokmijn (102) | ||
| 1144165 | 2010-10-13 02:21:00 | The feeling we get is that the 768 MB of our Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 graphics card is already starting to feel somewhat insufficient, The 768MB 460s are, imo, NOT a good option . They have significantly lower performance than their 1GB counterparts (8 less pixel shaders, 192bit vs 256bit memory bus - leads to about a 25% difference in raw pixel fillrate), for only a very small price difference . I can't believe any sites are actually trying to use the 768MB editions as a "value gaming" card . If you want to go cheap, go for a GTS450 or a 5750 for significantly less $$ and they're not *that* far below the 768MB 460 performance-wise . |
inphinity (7274) | ||
| 1144166 | 2010-10-13 02:26:00 | I've been doing a bit of gaming lately with Lord of the Rings Online (It's now free to play). Basically I started on my C2D 3Ghz, 512MB HD4850, 1680x1050. Details to absolute max in every in-game setting, anti-stropic filtering @ 4x and anti-aliasing at 8x. I still get around 65fps in most places. Pop it on my Macbook, 1280x720, moderate detail levels, 40fps Give it to my brother with his C2D 2Ghz (Overclocked to 2.25Ghz), HD4350, 1680x1050, details at moderate, 30fps Pop it into an old PC I've been putting together for use as a spare, 2.4Ghz P4, 512MB FX5200, 1024x768. Details to low, 40fps. Increase details to low-moderate, 25fps. Increase detail levels to moderate without anti-aliasing, 4-5fps What have I learned? It still works on rather old hardware, just not at higher resolutions with anti-aliasing and high detail levels etc, but it's still playable :) Am I a hard-core gamer? No, and that's probably the difference, that I'm happy with it not running at absolute max detail levels :p |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1144167 | 2010-10-13 02:36:00 | LoTRO is beautiful at max levels, especially with the new DX11 changes. | DeSade (984) | ||
| 1144168 | 2010-10-13 02:48:00 | Yeah I've got a friend who went out and got a DX11 card last week... drooling-worthy much?! :D Enabling DX11 and it took a fair bit of a performance hit though, granted he's running at 1920x1080 though with max *everything*! You play? Had another mate who used to play COD:MW2 semi-casually, had a GTX260 with a 3Ghz C2D. The dumbass went out and thought that spending a truckload (Around $4-500 I think?) on a Core2Quad 3Ghz was gonna increase his framerate. What an idiot. It did SFA. Told him not to, but he was too stubborn to accept advice from both me and the sales guy at PBTech, so it's kinda his own fault. |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1144169 | 2010-10-13 03:11:00 | Not much new. The problem when testing "real time strategy" games is, its very dependant on the conditions you set, what map, custom games with 500cap set over the normal 200 to name a few variables. www.techspot.com As you can see this article did find "tangible" differences between processor "architectures" with Starcaft 2. Supreme Commander 1 is a RTS where I can get it to crawl with a I7 at 4Ghz and its CPU bottleneck not GPU (well known sim speed issue). But largely agree with the article esp in relation to DX10,11 |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 1144170 | 2010-10-13 03:11:00 | I used to play a lot, got two lifetime accounts, not so much now, too many single players attracting my attention and TOR next year of course. Most of my characters are on Elendilmir but I have some starters on Darrowdelf also. |
DeSade (984) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||