Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/?menu...d=133800&image_id=797259&page=1&show=original
The site has a performance comparison up, saw it from another forum, tbh its foreign and i canne be bothered to read up everything but the numbers tell a story.
THe first numbers, dx10 runs significantly faster than dx9 at 1280x1024 no aa/af. The guy behind Ass's creed said that dx10 will offer basically no graphical improvements and it was made to use dx10 only for the speed it offers. Which it does, in some situations seem to. Finally some evidence dx10 is pretty decent. The thing is, you need to be doing the SAME thing to get the benefits from dx10, but most guys are adding a lot of , well fairly pointless stuff, as they can under dx10, which only kills performance. IE COH adds quite a large number of particles as the overhead decrease lets you increase said particles, but you still have to render all the extra stuff.
With aa/af there seems to be an issue and dx10 drops in performance,
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/?menu...d=133800&image_id=797263&page=1&show=original
large drop for ati, not so big a drop for nvidia, but still a drop. Which to me just says AA/AF needs some driver maturing done, and ATi probably need a new set of drivers.
the X2 and GX2 both run slower than single card counter part, marginally, which would indicate crossfire/sli don't work(yet) and that driver/cpu overhead is dropping the framerate a little.
I wish someone would come out and state in ANY review for any game/gfx card if they had flashed and confirmed the X2 they use has a bios with the powerplay speeds same as default. Its a big issue with the cards, and obviously if its running at lower speeds that drops both minimum and average framerate massively.
Oh, and for you AMD haters, a phenom 9700 ran the game FASTER than a Q6600, thats a 2.5Ghz vs a 2.4Ghz intel. AFAIK the latest prices are looking like the 9750 being a $215 cpu, thats going to put it at what, £130. From personal experience on stock cooler these things will hit 2.6Ghz but that cooler is crap. Tempted to throw rig together again to see what my 9600 can do under water. B3 might increase overclocking, but frankly both quads are more than fast enough at stock, though AMD have them cheaper.
EDIT:- just to cover myself, for all i know thats a weird site basing performance off the leaked copy, or it could be final version of game, or a legit review copy but still isn't final. Still interesting numbers. Looking at it again, the 9750 will be 2.4Ghz, but they show a 9700 at 2.6Ghz being faster, either way Phenom's are plenty good, at $215 for the top of the range quad, AMD are back to fighting through price.
The site has a performance comparison up, saw it from another forum, tbh its foreign and i canne be bothered to read up everything but the numbers tell a story.
THe first numbers, dx10 runs significantly faster than dx9 at 1280x1024 no aa/af. The guy behind Ass's creed said that dx10 will offer basically no graphical improvements and it was made to use dx10 only for the speed it offers. Which it does, in some situations seem to. Finally some evidence dx10 is pretty decent. The thing is, you need to be doing the SAME thing to get the benefits from dx10, but most guys are adding a lot of , well fairly pointless stuff, as they can under dx10, which only kills performance. IE COH adds quite a large number of particles as the overhead decrease lets you increase said particles, but you still have to render all the extra stuff.
With aa/af there seems to be an issue and dx10 drops in performance,
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/?menu...d=133800&image_id=797263&page=1&show=original
large drop for ati, not so big a drop for nvidia, but still a drop. Which to me just says AA/AF needs some driver maturing done, and ATi probably need a new set of drivers.
the X2 and GX2 both run slower than single card counter part, marginally, which would indicate crossfire/sli don't work(yet) and that driver/cpu overhead is dropping the framerate a little.
I wish someone would come out and state in ANY review for any game/gfx card if they had flashed and confirmed the X2 they use has a bios with the powerplay speeds same as default. Its a big issue with the cards, and obviously if its running at lower speeds that drops both minimum and average framerate massively.
Oh, and for you AMD haters, a phenom 9700 ran the game FASTER than a Q6600, thats a 2.5Ghz vs a 2.4Ghz intel. AFAIK the latest prices are looking like the 9750 being a $215 cpu, thats going to put it at what, £130. From personal experience on stock cooler these things will hit 2.6Ghz but that cooler is crap. Tempted to throw rig together again to see what my 9600 can do under water. B3 might increase overclocking, but frankly both quads are more than fast enough at stock, though AMD have them cheaper.
EDIT:- just to cover myself, for all i know thats a weird site basing performance off the leaked copy, or it could be final version of game, or a legit review copy but still isn't final. Still interesting numbers. Looking at it again, the 9750 will be 2.4Ghz, but they show a 9700 at 2.6Ghz being faster, either way Phenom's are plenty good, at $215 for the top of the range quad, AMD are back to fighting through price.
Last edited:
