Devil May Cry 4 Benchmark, DX9 and 10.

[Tom|Nbk]

Wow my PC had fun with that

DX10 High 8xCSAA 1680X1050

Scene 1 : 153.60
Scene 2 : 123.23
Scene 3 : 173.96
Scene 4 : 107.33

Overall rating : S

Reran DX10 with new Overclock

Scene 1 : 153.60
Scene 2 : 123.23
Scene 3 : 173.96
Scene 4 : 107.33

to

Scene 1 : 170.60
Scene 2 : 126.18
Scene 3 : 195.87
Scene 4 : 118.90

Game seems very sensitive to clock changes. Seems it was crying out for more memory speed

 

[gurusan]

this bench is poop tbh. every setup slaughters it, it's CPU bound, it seems to take ages to run, and the game is terrible as well.

 

[Broken Hope]

Super high with 8x AA.

 

[Devious]

xfire 4850's

All settings max, 8 AA.

 

[Darkwave]

gaming performance is always better under XP, regardless of what game it is.

I don't mean to be rude, but I wish people would look up benchmarks instead of just repeating what other people say. Vista has been on-par or slightly better than XP for gaming for quite some time now, mainly since the release of SP1. You can see some benchmarks here, I've seen similar results from my own benchmarks.

DMC4 Benchmark results: -
DirectX 9 Default Settings: 247.69, 230.81, 277.19, 140.71 [click]
DirectX 10 Default Settings: 204.97, 180.42, 246.40, 153.46 [click]
DirectX 9 1680x1050 8xAA: 68.78, 51.50, 77.15, 47.84 [click]

Very impressive benchmark, shame the DX10 mode doesn't do over 1280x1024 though.

System entirely at stock (2.4GHz on CPU and default clocks on 3870 X2).

 

[gurusan]

Server 2008 > Vista > XP

 

[chaparral]

Vista has been on-par or slightly better than XP for gaming for quite some time now, mainly since the release of SP1.

I always get much better FPS in XP then vista

 

[Darkwave]

I always get much better FPS in XP then vista

I don't, and neither do the benchmarks I linked to. *Shrug.*

 

[Final8y]

I don't, and neither do the benchmarks I linked to. *Shrug.*

Yep & some ppl seem to be blind & not notice my DX9-DX10 run & see that DX10 spanks DX9 with my setup.

 

[chaparral]

I don't, and neither do the benchmarks I linked to. *Shrug.*

Did you fail to notice that all them tests in them links were done with an ATI/AMD GPU card

 

[Darkwave]

Yep & some ppl seem to be blind & not notice my DX9-DX10 run & see that DX10 spanks DX9 with my setup.

How did you get the DX10 run working at over 1280x1024? The option is not there for me.

Did you fail to notice that all them tests in them links were done with an ATI/AMD GPU card

So you're saying what, Nvidia suck at Vista drivers? I knew this already after owning three 8800s.

 

[Final8y]

Did you fail to notice that all them tests in them links were done with an ATI/AMD GPU card

And just proves that NV drivers are not as good on vista yet & its not a fault of vista or ATI cards would fair the same as that was the original point.

 

[Final8y]

How did you get the DX10 run working at over 1280x1024? The option is not there for me.

I'm using the full demo version not the BM version or it could be a monitor EDID thing. i can run at 2560x1600 60fps V-Sync goodness.

 

[Darkwave]

I'm using the full demo version not the BM version or it could be a monitor EDID thing. i can run at 2560x1600 60fps V-Sync goodness.

Ah right, I am only running the standalone benchmark version.

It does DX9 resolutions fine but not DX10 ones.

 

[chaparral]

So you're saying what, Nvidia suck at Vista drivers? I knew this already after owning three 8800s.

If you owned three 8800gtx cards then you should have know that the person (8800gts owner)you quoted,,his vista performance would not of been on-par with his XP performance

I don't mean to be rude, but I wish people would look up benchmarks instead of just repeating what other people say. Vista has been on-par or slightly better than XP for gaming for quite some time now,).

 

[Darkwave]

If you owned three 8800gtx cards then you should have know that the person (8800gts owner)you quoted vista performance would not of been on-par with his XP performance

He didn't say anything about Nvidia though, just a typical blanket statement about Vista.

I hated Vista when I first tried it but, now I have a legit version that's fully patched up with SP1, it's a better experience than I had on XP. I am not saying that everyone should rush out and buy Vista, if XP is fine for you then fine, but I am tired of reading blanket statements and second-hand comments.

 

[Tom|Nbk]

Vista drivers whats wrong with them?

Been top for me so far. The only games that run poop in Vista compared to XP I've noticed is TF2 and BF2. The latter is getting on a bit so can hardly blame the game.

 

[Darkwave]

Vista drivers whats wrong with them?

Been top for me so far. The only games that run poop in Vista compared to XP I've noticed is TF2 and BF2. The latter is getting on a bit so can hardly blame the game.

Dunno if they're better now, but when I had my Nvidia cards the Vista drivers were ****. Performance was generally hit-and-miss, and the compatibility with my Samsung LCD TV was dreadful, pretty much why I ended up getting an X2 instead. Anyway, we're going a little off-topic lol.

 

[Tom|Nbk]

Can't speak about the TV as I don't have one but most games seem to run spot on apart from a slight couple. 64Bit is a nice OS really especially as the driver support is as good as 32bit now.

Anyway yea off topic sorry everyone.

 

[Broken Hope]

How did you get the DX10 run working at over 1280x1024? The option is not there for me.

Are you running a TFT or a CRT? I'm using a CRT and I had to lower the refresh in the benchmark options before it would let me go over 1280x1024 since my monitor can't do 1600x1200 at the same refresh as it can do 1280x1024.