• 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.

*** Far Cry 2 1680 x 1050 max settings Top List ***

AndyOcUK said:
Read the OP mate - wrong test and you only need 1 run :)
Click to expand...


No difference at all from drivers, oh well, it will have to remain a mystery I guess.

Only difference seems to be with AA , 180.43 came out 7fps quicker then 178.24, I only loose 4fps adding 4xAA. :D

New score below, 66.57, with everything set to high performance, not what I had in mind but thats the best I can do for now.

http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=loldl1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Heheh. You're absolutely correct in that. Though throwing more money at the problem never hurts :D

My Q6600 is at the limit with this cooling, but i have no idea with this 260. The cooler seems to be doing a stella job at keeping it in check, and i've been gaming at the clocks i used for this benchmark for hours with no problems. Maybe squeezing a bit more out of my ram and fsb would help. This benchmark is an odd one, as it doesn't seem to be stressing anything in particular.
 
Adrianr said:
Heheh. You're absolutely correct in that. Though throwing more money at the problem never hurts :D

My Q6600 is at the limit with this cooling, but i have no idea with this 260. The cooler seems to be doing a stella job at keeping it in check, and i've been gaming at the clocks i used for this benchmark for hours with no problems. Maybe squeezing a bit more out of my ram and fsb would help. This benchmark is an odd one, as it doesn't seem to be stressing anything in particular.
Click to expand...

Totally agree mate -

Difference in my rig between 3.2GHz and 4.0GHz is tiny compared to what you think it would be. The game doesn't seem to need GB's of RAM, silly FSB's or quad core CPU's so much as a fast card.

I've dropped my rig back down to 3.0GHz for everyday use (1333MHz X 9 Multi in Sync with the RAM @1333MHz (666MHz DDR3) - Simply because, it goes like a stabbed rat anyway and runs Crysis maxed out at a resolution of 1680 X 1050 - no point thrashing the electricity bill :)
 
thats pretty much what I've done, I run my Q6600 which I know I can get to 3.8ghz at 3ghz because I can run it passively on my watercooling and there's almost no difference in performance when its clocked higher making loads of noise and piling cash into E.ONs bulging pockets.

Still, this benchmark has got me thinking! :)
 
This is bad,

I ran FC2 benchmark as per the OP's requirements,

and I am only getting about 28fps with the system at the sig below...

What am I doing wrong??

EDIT: I disabled Crossfire in CCC and ran the benchmark, with a single 4850 I actually have about 30fps, an increase in performance. i am using Cat 8.10.

EDIT 2: I was being too hasty, i was doing it all wrong. Farcry2 Hotfix did it for me. Now it's at 38.51fps.
 
Last edited:
matt100 said:
thats pretty much what I've done, I run my Q6600 which I know I can get to 3.8ghz at 3ghz because I can run it passively on my watercooling and there's almost no difference in performance when its clocked higher making loads of noise and piling cash into E.ONs bulging pockets.

Still, this benchmark has got me thinking! :)
Click to expand...

Exactly the same here mate - with my Asus Qfan options enabled on all my fans, the three 120mm fans on my rad hardly move unless gaming or benching. As I said, games are smooth as anything - in a nutshell it laughs at anything I throw at it and does it cooly and quietly at 3.0GHz :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom