• 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.

Cheapest GPU that can run Call of Duty Black Ops at 1920x1080?

jb7

jb7

jb7

Associate
Joined
28 Jul 2009
Posts
360
System: i7 920 @ 3.4ghz, 6GB DDR3

Hi, I was wondering whether you could advise me on which GPU to buy. The main use of this GPU will be to play Black Ops, with everything on full settings (1920x1080, full AA, etc etc)

What GPU should be able to handle this, given my CPU and RAM? thanks
 
I can get pretty close to playing it on full settings with my 5770 with 2x aa. i am getting a 6870 tomorrow so i should be able to let you know how i go at full setting with that card.
 
^^ currently the framerate your getting with any solution is at best 2/3rds lower than it should be.


http://aten-hosted.com/images/codmpr.jpg

Comparision of Multiplayer MW2 v Black Ops using as close to same config settings on a map of similiar visual and technical complexity - unfortunatly can't unlock the fps on MW2 online without using whats considered a hack but from offline testing it should hit around 250fps average.
 
Last edited:
Ive had every Cod game in the last few years bar this.

Im glad for once i didnt pre-order, and have read the forums here on the game, to hear about poor performance and dated DX9 graphics

If a 5870 cant max out a DX9 game and give smooth game play, then the game has serious problems.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it does :S the rendering threads are severely starved out. Its been suggested that its running like on the xbox where the CPU is used to swap data in and out of RAM constantly to stay within the limited physical RAM on the xbox - only on the PC this is both completely un-necessary and counter intuiative for best performance on the architecture.
 
Rroff said:
Yeah it does :S the rendering threads are severely starved out. Its been suggested that its running like on the xbox where the CPU is used to swap data in and out of RAM constantly to stay within the limited physical RAM on the xbox - only on the PC this is both completely un-necessary and counter intuiative for best performance on the architecture.
Click to expand...

So in other words it hasn't been ported/coded correctly for the pc?
 
more or less.

A very simplified explanation - it still feels rubbish at 60fps because the framerate is made up of lots of gaps with hardly any updates while the CPU is busy, then a massive rush of faster frame updates between those gaps averaging out at about 60fps but actually feeling more like 20-30.
 
Last edited:
At lot of the choppyness and laggy issues in single/multiplayer can be defeated by turning off shadows in the graphics options and turning on vsync.

a 460 GTX 768 meg will suit your needs fine.
 
Vale said:
At lot of the choppyness and laggy issues in single/multiplayer can be defeated by turning off shadows in the graphics options and turning on vsync.

a 460 GTX 768 meg will suit your needs fine.
Click to expand...

768 of video ram enough for 1920 by 1080 on full settings for the OP?

I would say no at i guess, but i havent got the game so i cant be sure ;)
 
Last edited:
Vale said:
At lot of the choppyness and laggy issues in single/multiplayer can be defeated by turning off shadows in the graphics options and turning on vsync.

a 460 GTX 768 meg will suit your needs fine.
Click to expand...

Which makes the game uglier and masks the more erratic choppy/laggyness in a more consistant frame of latency - personally I can feel just how much I am behind the game onscreen using those options tho it might keep some people happy.
 
it comes down to personal choice really.
some ppl can game at 30fps and say its smooth.
me personaly unless its strategy game, big nono
 
Rroff said:
Which makes the game uglier and masks the more erratic choppy/laggyness in a more consistant frame of latency - personally I can feel just how much I am behind the game onscreen using those options tho it might keep some people happy.
Click to expand...

Yea i tried v-sync and could feel the lag. Theres no way i could play like that.
 
What I find funny is the way they are smoothing videos in the theatre option - granted it makes sense to smooth them out for capture somewhat - but the way its been done (when taking into account the nature of the performance problems) suggests they knew about the performance issues all along :S
 
A few fraps benches ive just ran, cuban level as i havent played much of the sp.

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
30818, 363868, 28, 94, 84.696

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
30374, 348461, 59, 95, 87.166

All settings on high, 4 x aa, 1920x1200. GTX 470 @751 mhz, max memory usage in game was 842mb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom