• 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.

HardOCP Max Payne 3 performance review

wolvers said:
No, I don't think they did use the CAP profile. Read it again, he's saying that they used 301.42 but not the CAP because they think it does nothing for single card performance in MP3. Clearly they have done it wrong. LOL, how difficult is it for reviewers to research these things properly?!
Click to expand...

I think your right wolvers after reading it again, daft not showing what drivers were being used in the review anyway(unless I missed it).

wolvers said:
Nvidia are contradicting themselves a bit over MSAA. In their MP3 reviewers guide they go on about how FXAA is better and more efficient than the aging MSAA. Yet in their tweaking guide their own comparison shots clearly show that FXAA needs a bit of help from MSAA to get the stuff missed. If you read the way their reviewers guide is written about MSAA, that'll be why they aren't using it in reviews.
Click to expand...

I have everything turned to the max@1080p and it looks fantastic, certainly much sharper than just FXAA, so it's silly not to use it imo if you can.

On a side note, I didn't have a clue that it's running on a modified Rage engine!:eek:
 
Its the Rockstar Advanced Game Engine in Max Payne 3 not idtech5 that powered the game RAGE.
 
Last edited:
That benchmark score in the first post is a load of tosh!

I have never seen lower than 150fps
Average around 220fps
Max around 340fps

2560x1600 - u3011
Everything set to veryhigh except shadows
DX11
Tesselation off - (Can you really notice the difference?)

560ti Super OverClock 972mhz core.
4.50ghz i7 2600k

This game is optimized! :p
 
Supernaut91 said:
That benchmark score in the first post is a load of tosh!

I have never seen lower than 150fps
Average around 220fps
Max around 340fps

2560x1600 - u3011
Everything set to veryhigh except shadows
DX11
Tesselation off - (Can you really notice the difference?)

560ti Super OverClock 972mhz core.
4.50ghz i7 2600k

This game is optimized! :p
Click to expand...

Lol I think your frame rates are a load of tosh. You are reading them incorrectly, read the thread above and see. Try fraps to record your frame rate.
 
Supernaut91 said:
That benchmark score in the first post is a load of tosh!

I have never seen lower than 150fps
Average around 220fps
Max around 340fps

2560x1600 - u3011
Everything set to veryhigh except shadows
DX11
Tesselation off - (Can you really notice the difference?)

560ti Super OverClock 972mhz core.
4.50ghz i7 2600k

This game is optimized! :p
Click to expand...

I presuming you're being ironic. Or using afterburner. Or both!

However, at simllar settings with 2x 670's, i7 2600k @ 4.2:

2560x1600 - u3011
Everything set to very high (everything)
DX11
FXAA - very high
MSAA - 2x
Ambient Occulsion HDAO
Tesselation very high - (yes, you see a massive difference, some things have depth)

I can maintain as near to 60fps with those settings (using fraps). If I lift MSAA to 4x (because of the mis-reading of vram with sli I can) then the fps do dip but what is even worse is that damn 6 series st st stutter. You don't see it in fraps fps counter but you see it on screen, like something is tugging the screen refresh. On a 30" screen it's damn noticeable and not tolerable.

So dropped the MSAA to 2x with FXAA on vh and enjoyed the game. Looked amazing sometimes, good story and think it'll be the rare game I'll go back and play again.
 
Supernaut91 said:
That benchmark score in the first post is a load of tosh!

I have never seen lower than 150fps
Average around 220fps
Max around 340fps

2560x1600 - u3011
Everything set to veryhigh except shadows
DX11
Tesselation off - (Can you really notice the difference?)

560ti Super OverClock 972mhz core.
4.50ghz i7 2600k

This game is optimized! :p
Click to expand...

LOL, I love the way you think you're averaging 220fps! :o :D
 
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/06/12/max_payne_3_performance_iq_review/1

[H] has just updated their MP3 IQ review, maybe the op wants to update?

Few things to note:

'For drivers we used NVIDIA ForceWare 301.42. For AMD we used Catalyst 12.6 Beta and CAP 12.6 Beta.'

Should have been used in the original review, wonder why they didn't.;)

'Technically the HD 7970 is faster at FXAA. However, with percentages and performance so tiny it doesn't really matter, either way it is an unnoticeable hit to the overall game's performance you won't notice it.'

'At 4X MSAA the HD 7970's lead over the GTX 680 grows a bit. The HD 7970 is now 6.7% faster than the GTX 680. That is almost as separated as these were with No AA. It seems as the traditional MSAA goes up, the HD 7970 separates itself more from the GTX 680.

Now, these are just tiny percentages, and anything under 10% really isn't going to be noticed in-game. So in the overall experience, it really means nothing.'

Basically the 7970 has the performance crown in regards to MP3 by the tiniest of margins... but your not going to notice it.
 
tommybhoy said:
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/06/12/max_payne_3_performance_iq_review/1

[H] has just updated their MP3 IQ review, maybe the op wants to update?

Few things to note:

'For drivers we used NVIDIA ForceWare 301.42. For AMD we used Catalyst 12.6 Beta and CAP 12.6 Beta.'

Should have been used in the original review, wonder why they didn't.;)

'Technically the HD 7970 is faster at FXAA. However, with percentages and performance so tiny it doesn't really matter, either way it is an unnoticeable hit to the overall game's performance you won't notice it.'

'At 4X MSAA the HD 7970's lead over the GTX 680 grows a bit. The HD 7970 is now 6.7% faster than the GTX 680. That is almost as separated as these were with No AA. It seems as the traditional MSAA goes up, the HD 7970 separates itself more from the GTX 680.

Now, these are just tiny percentages, and anything under 10% really isn't going to be noticed in-game. So in the overall experience, it really means nothing.'

Basically the 7970 has the performance crown in regards to MP3 by the tiniest of margins... but your not going to notice it.
Click to expand...

Good find tommy. Finally they decide to use the correct drivers.
 
tommybhoy said:
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/06/12/max_payne_3_performance_iq_review/1

[H] has just updated their MP3 IQ review, maybe the op wants to update?

Few things to note:

'For drivers we used NVIDIA ForceWare 301.42. For AMD we used Catalyst 12.6 Beta and CAP 12.6 Beta.'

Should have been used in the original review, wonder why they didn't.;)

'Technically the HD 7970 is faster at FXAA. However, with percentages and performance so tiny it doesn't really matter, either way it is an unnoticeable hit to the overall game's performance you won't notice it.'

'At 4X MSAA the HD 7970's lead over the GTX 680 grows a bit. The HD 7970 is now 6.7% faster than the GTX 680. That is almost as separated as these were with No AA. It seems as the traditional MSAA goes up, the HD 7970 separates itself more from the GTX 680.

Now, these are just tiny percentages, and anything under 10% really isn't going to be noticed in-game. So in the overall experience, it really means nothing.'

Basically the 7970 has the performance crown in regards to MP3 by the tiniest of margins... but your not going to notice it.
Click to expand...

They conclude that you cant use MSAA 4x with a 680 or a 670, even at 1920x1080, but on the Nvidia optimise website they claim optimal settings include MSAA x4 for both 670 and 680.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom