Street Fight IV PC-Benchmark Released

Is that good or bad :eek: looks like more Core i7 love from Capcom!!
2a5ab8h.jpg

Tried the different settings and Watercoour actually gives over 1FPS more. Posterizing gives 1FPS less. This is all with max everything no AA + no vsync.

With max everything & CQx16AA the FPS drops to just above 62.
 
Last edited:
SCORE: 12521
AVERAGE: 101.13FPS
OS: Windows Vista(TM) Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
Memory: 4094MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GX2
Display Setting: 1680x1050 60Hz


Cammy's bum looks very toight b.t.w. :D

streetfighterivbenchmarc.jpg
 
Last edited:
LOL The actual speed is locked to the FPS, with no AA at 1920x1200 it was going at 250fps and the fights were over in 5 or 6 seconds, surely the full game won't be like this?

If it is, it's still fine, just set vsync on, but still funny o.o
 
The download is really slow :(

Anyone have a similar setup to this and have FPS examples:

8600GT
e6600 * 3.5GHz
6GB RAM
1280*720
no AA, AF etc, settings on minimum

and

8400GS
9300 mobile (C2D @ 2.5GHz)
3GB RAM
1280*720
no AA, AF etc, settings on minimum

Cheers
 
BoozerDawg said:
What res ? And did you turn V-sync off in the options ?
Click to expand...

1680 x 1050 resolution

And yes I turned off vsync.

I ran it some more times. Here is what I get with default settings and 1280x800 res and no AA:

sf1jbg.jpg


And here is what I get with the same settings but with 2xAA only:

sf2utg.jpg


Didnt know my 9600GT 512mb was that weak, almost half the fps from just using 2xAA! BTW CPU is @ 3ghz not 1.8 like the screenshots show.
 
thepigf@rmer said:
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8618/streetfighterivbenchmarc.jpg[img][/QUOTE]

Close up:
[IMG]http://iv2ycq.blu.livefilestore.com/y1p_zYZqWMzMhyikrFi2EVqLdtWqObnOypAWqhI3OJTSePNqtDM_WlTZ_oQ3VLgp6HFzVI6ewpQAwI0EPsdIiyI4A/StreetFighterIV_Benchmark%202009-06-15%2000-09-48-53.png


Shame it doesn't look that good from up close.
Click to expand...
 
Quite surprised how well my PC faired:

SCORE: 8773
AVERAGE: 52.91FPS
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+
Memory: 4096MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX
Display Setting: 1680x1050 60Hz
 
Strife212 said:
Did no one elses run at an insane speed? By that I mean the actual speed of the game was insane, not the FPS.
Click to expand...

Its how benchmarks work. The demo is actually a set of frames that need to be played. It benchmarks your system by calculating how long it takes to show all those frames. The better your system the faster your fps and the quicker it shows all those frames.

Its the same with futuremark benchmarks and if anyone has doom 3 or even quake 3, running a timedemo of a demo will do the same thing.

The final game wont be like this, this is just for benchmarking purposes.
 
Put all settings in catalyst control centre to full high quality etc

SCORE: 7600
AVERAGE: 93.27FPS
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU @ 2.40GHz
Memory: 4096MB
Graphics Card: ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
Display Setting: 1920x1200 60Hz 8xAA

(c)CAPCOM U.S.A., INC. 2008, 2009 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
 
xiphrex said:
Its how benchmarks work. The demo is actually a set of frames that need to be played. It benchmarks your system by calculating how long it takes to show all those frames. The better your system the faster your fps and the quicker it shows all those frames.

Its the same with futuremark benchmarks and if anyone has doom 3 or even quake 3, running a timedemo of a demo will do the same thing.

The final game wont be like this, this is just for benchmarking purposes.
Click to expand...

I've run many a benchmark in my time, never realised this. I just assumed it was like taking the average FPS ingame; a set amount of time which always remained the same, and the frames per second calculated during that time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom