Anand: PII vs. Q9550 vs. i7 crossfire, Phenom II = smoother Game Play

Final8y · 2 Feb 2009 at 19:10

Originally Posted by anand
During testing, the Intel systems would generate minimum frame rates at this resolutions about 23~24fps on a couple of runs and then jump to their current results on the others. We noticed this in game play also; the Intel systems would hitch and pause at times. We would shutdown the game, clear the prefetch folder, and reboot. The game would operate fine in the next series of testing although we still had stuttering in intensive ground scenes at times. We tried new images, different CPUs, memory changes, and the Sapphire HD 4870 cards with the same results. The Phenom II 940 had extremely stable frame rates in each test and action was very fluid during game play.

Originally Posted by anand
After playing through the several levels on each platform, we thought the Phenom II 940 offered a better overall gaming experience in this title than the Intel Q9550 based on smoother game play. It is difficult to quantify without a video capture, but player movement and weapon control just seemed to be more precise. Of course, if you have the funds, we would recommend the i7 platform for best possible performance.

Originally Posted by anand
The Phenom II is slightly ahead of the Q9550 when overclocked although it is at a 7% clock speed disadvantage. We have noticed the CryEngine 2 will respond to improved memory bandwidth and latencies as we clock up the processors. The i7 holds a 14% advantage in average frame rates while the Phenom II once again impresses us with the best minimum frame rates when overclocked. However, not having a 20fps minimum frame rate is a disappointment with our multi-GPU setups. The NVIDIA 260/285 solutions scale better in SLI than the ATI HD 4870 products. We hope that ATI can improve their drivers for this game.

Originally Posted by anand
Now that we have discussed the numbers, what about game play experience? As we alluded to earlier, the Intel platforms had problems with minimum frame rates throughout testing, not just in the benchmarks, but also during game play in various levels and on-line. We have not nailed it down yet, but we have noticed this problem consistently. In the meantime, the Phenom II X4 940 had rock solid frame rates and offered the smoothest game play experience.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3506&p=1

Margaret · 2 Feb 2009 at 21:51

Interesting! Will be looking to upgrade my CPU in a few months so will have to keep an eye on this.

gurusan · 2 Feb 2009 at 21:54

omgz, not more of this Phenom = "smoother" bs

psychas · 2 Feb 2009 at 21:59

O_o i thing visual smoothness comes from video cards not from cpu's :confused:

Inazuma · 2 Feb 2009 at 22:06

Pentium II? :eek:

[timko] · 2 Feb 2009 at 22:22

Inazuma said:
Pentium II?

That's what I was thinking too when I read the title :cool:

Darg · 2 Feb 2009 at 22:58

Someone left speedstep on :rolleyes:

snowdog · 2 Feb 2009 at 23:47

Why have they tested with games that are barely cpu dependent?

Test with GTA IV/ Supcom FFS and not CoD: WaW, Far Cry 2 and Fallout3. The only game worth looking at in that review is L4D.

VortexA1 · 3 Feb 2009 at 03:34

snowdog said:
Why have they tested with games that are barely cpu dependent?

Test with GTA IV/ Supcom FFS and not CoD: WaW, Far Cry 2 and Fallout3. The only game worth looking at in that review is L4D.

Good point .