Street Fight IV PC-Benchmark Released

KaneStatton · 16 Jun 2009 at 01:58

Oh yeh running drivers 8.5 lol need to update them.

Kreeeee · 16 Jun 2009 at 02:00

Streeteh said:
<snip>

That lag is caused by the way the game synchronises all actions rather than using a GGPO rollback style system. Nothing to do with the rendering of the game.

I'd explain it in detail but it takes so long to type it I really can't be arsed

RevBillyG · 16 Jun 2009 at 06:32

Quite remarkable how well this benchmark does on old hardware:

Running at 2.7gig

LabR@t · 16 Jun 2009 at 06:53

wow looks better than my ps3

Chandler_90 · 16 Jun 2009 at 11:39

SCORE: 5829
AVERAGE: 57.00FPS
OS: Windows Vista(TM) Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (Actually 3.8 w/ no HT)
Memory: 6134MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
Display Setting: 1920x1080 60Hz C16xQAA

A little low for me tbh.. gonna update my gfx drivers

PiKe · 16 Jun 2009 at 11:41

Chandler_90 said:
SCORE: 5829
AVERAGE: 57.00FPS
OS: Windows Vista(TM) Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (Actually 3.8 w/ no HT)
Memory: 6134MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
Display Setting: 1920x1080 60Hz C16xQAA

A little low for me tbh.. gonna update my gfx drivers

Why no HT, what's the point?

jmc007 · 16 Jun 2009 at 11:41

All max...
SCORE: 9669
AVERAGE: 121.50FPS
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz
Memory: 4096MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285
Display Setting: 1280x1024 60Hz C16xQAA

KaneStatton · 16 Jun 2009 at 11:51

Everything stock so I'm well happy.

Streeteh · 16 Jun 2009 at 12:01

mame said:
out of interest, just try it with c16xAA just to see if it runs? not after you posting the results.

Yep, it does run. Not as bad a framerate either if i'm honest (45FPS) i get less than that with 2xAA in windowed mode so clearly running it fullscreen boosts performance somewhat.

jmc007 · 16 Jun 2009 at 12:07

So what is going on with Vsync? I can see the animations clearer, though surely the game is running slower?

Chandler_90 · 16 Jun 2009 at 12:18

Clocked down to 3.6 and enabled HT.
Updated drivers to 185.85 (whihc inceidentally are lagging for some reason)

SCORE: 8961
AVERAGE: 119.87FPS
OS: Windows Vista(TM) Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 6134MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
Display Setting: 1920x1080 24Hz C16xQAA

I'm happier.. just need to sort out the windows lag.. my mouse feels horrible

Edit - Sorted lag so its a BIG

from me

e36Adz · 16 Jun 2009 at 13:18

Rank: A

SCORE: 6413
AVERAGE: 63.98FPS
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
Memory: 4096MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.1)
Display Setting: 1920x1200 60Hz 2xAA

(c)CAPCOM U.S.A., INC. 2008, 2009 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Everything on high/highest, V-sync OFF, cpu @ 3.4Ghz, gfx @ stock.

It actually had a slight flicker which was noticeable but this is sorted once V-sync is ON. If I can play this at the highest settings @ 1920x1200 I will be pleased! Looks so much better then what I am use to seeing on the PS3.

[timko] · 16 Jun 2009 at 14:16

Opteron 165 @ 2.8Ghz
8800GT @ 720gpu 1800shader 975mem
1920 x 1200 fullscreen
All settings on High
VSync Off
4 x AA
4 x AF

Anyone else got an older rig to compare this against? :cool:

.one. · 16 Jun 2009 at 14:21

[timko];14294314 said:
Opteron 165 @ 2.8Ghz
8800GT @ 720gpu 1800shader 975mem
1920 x 1200 fullscreen
All settings on High
VSync Off
4 x AA
4 x AF

Anyone else got an older rig to compare this against?

Thats a nice result.

e36Adz · 16 Jun 2009 at 14:24

[QUOTE='[timko]...[/QUOTE]

That's not bad at all. Infact, it seems v impressive.

What drivers are you using? I notice you are using Win XP, wonder if that makes any difference.

xiphrex · 16 Jun 2009 at 14:53

Chandler_90 said:
Clocked down to 3.6 and enabled HT.
Updated drivers to 185.85 (whihc inceidentally are lagging for some reason)

SCORE: 8961
AVERAGE: 119.87FPS

Did you just enable HT (and reduce CPU clock by 200mhz in the process) and update your gfx drivers and go from average 57fps to 119fps?!

If so thats amazing, what a difference!

Or maybe you also turned vsync off?

[timko] · 16 Jun 2009 at 14:59

e36Adz said:
That's not bad at all. Infact, it seems v impressive.

What drivers are you using? I notice you are using Win XP, wonder if that makes any difference.

I'm using the latest non-beta of 185.85. I think my result only looks good because it's posted right after yours. There's something holding things back on your rig for sure, you should be a lot closer to the 100fps mark with vsync being off

e36Adz · 16 Jun 2009 at 15:05

[timko];14294637 said:
I'm using the latest non-beta of 185.85. I think my result only looks good because it's posted right after yours. There's something holding things back on your rig for sure, you should be a lot closer to the 100fps mark with vsync being off

Just tried something else. I turned off AA in the actual benchmark settings, but switched to 16XQ AA and 16X AF in the nvidia control panel, and noticed it actually ran a lot smoother.

SCORE: 7858
AVERAGE: 59.85FPS
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
Memory: 4096MB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.1)
Display Setting: 1920x1200 60Hz

All settings HIGHEST
16XQ AA
16X AF
V-sync ON

It ran smooth with absolutely no slow downs during any ultras or the character part at the end.

Gimpymoo · 16 Jun 2009 at 15:12

Is this surprising a lot of people?

I did not expect anything as optimised as this.

PinkFloyd · 16 Jun 2009 at 15:19

Impressed with that considering I'm at 1920x1200 on a ATI 4670, settings on medium/high. No AA or AF.