• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

ATI Radeon 5870 and 5870X2 specs revealed?

Of course they will come out by then, they always do, to coincide with the big Xmas releases that always come around at that time, plus with Xmas pressies they always get snapped up, whether you buy these cards for someone else, or as a special present to yourself ;)
 
Farcry looks better than cry your eyes out low frame rates sis at 1920 * 1200 and you can run it on a "speak and spell" and still get great frame rates.

TBH Farcry is the bench mark of how an FPS should look and run. That game never stuttered or dropped to low frame rates once.
 
rayb74 said:
Farcry looks better than cry your eyes out low frame rates sis at 1920 * 1200 and you can run it on a "speak and spell" and still get great frame rates.

TBH Farcry is the bench mark of how an FPS should look and run. That game never stuttered or dropped to low frame rates once.
Click to expand...

It ran fine, but it really didn't look as good as Crysis. The fire was about the only graphical content with some depth IMO.
 
I wouldnt be bothered with Farcry, as it doesnt have the suit where you can change it to certain settings, which is the reason I like the game so much as I usually hate any FPS games, but this one is unique and a very great game to play, I look forward to playing it the way it should be played this weekend :D
 
Abit off topic I know, but I find it funny on how everyone rags on the CryEngine 2 (aka Crysis) for being unoptimised, yet you put put everything on low, it looks very similar to Far Cry and you get Very similar FPS (in the 100's). The problem with Crysis is that it didn't have more graphics option to let you mix and match, particular on the shader options.

Crysis on med still look good, on high it looks better than pretty much anything else out there and on Very High it'll look better than many games the years to come.

Until another game comes out that does what Crysis does with graphics and gets better fps, I think people should hold fire on the criticism.
 
Magnum_Force said:
Abit off topic I know, but I find it funny on how everyone rags on the CryEngine 2 (aka Crysis) for being unoptimised, yet you put put everything on low, it looks very similar to Far Cry and you get Very similar FPS (in the 100's). The problem with Crysis is that it didn't have more graphics option to let you mix and match, particular on the shader options.

Crysis on med still look good, on high it looks better than pretty much anything else out there and on Very High it'll look better than many games the years to come.

Until another game comes out that does what Crysis does with graphics and gets better fps, I think people should hold fire on the criticism.
Click to expand...

Didn't you know, everyone on this forum is a veteran games developer, with boundless insights into code optimisation ... Crysis is poorly coded, trust us.
 
It might be poorly coded at the end of the day, but something that has graphics to stand the test of time, even games recently released cannot match the graphical excellence of Crysis, and thats saying something!
 
reflux said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I hope there are actually some games available to test these cards when they come out.
Click to expand...

Why should there be? They will go for the mass market and the mass market wont be the very top end, so i cant see them pushing any boundaries with any games in the next six months or so.
 
With DX11 being a brand new feature set of instructions and requirements, I cant see any big games coming out until 6 months after the cards have come out tbh
 
danceMB said:
With DX11 being a brand new feature set of instructions and requirements, I cant see any big games coming out until 6 months after the cards have come out tbh
Click to expand...

By that time refreshes might turn up with better clocks, could be worth waiting for those if you want to run dx11 based games smoothly. or not?

maybe this gen we'll see no refresh like what happened with the 8800gtx? hope not.

on the other hand, i may just go for 2 of the best midrange cards, as long as they are near top card performance and cost quite a bit cheaper :)
 
Last edited:
There are definatly a lot of options to choose at the moment, but for me its definatly a single GTX295 as I want really good, fast performance, now and right into the future, which my setup should be able to give me, even though "future-proof" doesnt live too long in the graphics card world
 
No matter how tempting it might be, I would never even attempt to go Quad-SLI or Quad -Crossfire, too many problems and not a great deal of performance either!
 
Hmmm the figures look quite promising but I am not holding my breath for DX11, DX10 fell flat on its bum for me to be honest. There was some nice effects but DX10 generally ran like turd on high DX10 cards, and DX10 has been out for a while now, but there was just way to much of a performance hit for it to be worth it....I hope DX11 changes that and actually gives you the performance along with some nice improvements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom