• 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.

*** OcUK Crysis DX9 TopList ***

14.975fps
PiKe
AMD x4200+ @2.2ghz (stock)
Nvidia 7900GTX @ stock
Windows XP 32bit SP1

crysisbench.JPG
 
Tom|Nbk said:
Unless you're comparing "Pong" performance that is very doubtful, the 7950GX2 is around the same performance as a G80 GTS if that.
Click to expand...

Depends on the game, etc. but I get faster performance than the old GTS in most games and very close to the stock 8800GT performance - generally only 1-2fps less... my GX2 is not at stock tho, I have the spacer kit fitted, etc. and clocked back to 7900GTX SLI performance (~11.3K in 3D Marks 06 compared to about 9.2K for stock)

Wish the 9800GTX would hurry up tho, while the GX2 owns in older titles and in ETQW it thrashes most of the 8800 series, but in shader heavy games like bioshock and now crysis its starting to show how old the engine is under the bonnet... but its not worth the money getting an 8800 series for such a small difference in most titles.
 
Last edited:
willhub said:
Got an XP one here:

45.24 fps
willhub
E6600 @ 3400MHz
8800GT @ 700/1800/1000
XP 32Bit
Click to expand...

So how do you get 10FPS+ more than I do, if your CPU is 100MHz faster yet I have a better GPU?

Maybe the GTX's would pull away at a higher resolution.. idk.

EDIT: Nevermind, tried again and that equaled much better results, from the bottom of the GTX list, way up to the top - much to my surprise!

51.735 fps
Dharok
E6300 @ 3304mhz
8800GTX @ 630/2000/1504
XP 32Bit

CrysisBench2.png
 
Last edited:
Yeah I don't think it can be used for accurate comparisons... for instance when I first started running it I had high and ultra high settings swapped in the config files so got a very poor score using high in the benchmark tool.
 
Something I noticed when running this benchmark, I am using the OCuk value 24" monitor, and it does not support the 1280 x 1024 resolution straight off, you have to set up a Custom Resolution in Nvidia Control panel, so if when running this benchmark you select (in the utility) to run at 1280 x 1024 it actually runs at a (monitor supported) resolution 0f 1280 x 800, which gives a higher FPS.....so I chose to use a monitor that supported the resolution of 1280 x 1024 rather than create a Custom Resolution....:)
 
jbloggs said:
Something I noticed when running this benchmark, I am using the OCuk value 24" monitor, and it does not support the 1280 x 1024 resolution straight off, you have to set up a Custom Resolution in Nvidia Control panel, so if when running this benchmark you select (in the utility) to run at 1280 x 1024 it actually runs at a (monitor supported) resolution 0f 1280 x 800, which gives a higher FPS.....so I chose to use a monitor that supported the resolution of 1280 x 1024 rather than create a Custom Resolution....:)
Click to expand...

does not support 1280x1024? that's bizzaro ! :p
 
Tom|Nbk said:
How did you manage that Dharok, I have a faster GTX and CPU yet you're getting 10FPS more average?.

Something very dodgy is going on with this "Benchmark Tool"
Click to expand...

yep that looks unusually high for a moderately clocked GTX when vogon above me only has a couple more fps with an Ultra @ 720.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom