**** OcUK Crysis Warhead Top-List ****

[RavenXXX2]

Poster no 156 is running the flythrough.

 

[TheRealDeal]

On the screenshot i am looking at it says 3x@Ambush flythrough in 2 different parts.

 

[marc2003]

haha, my browser was caching the old image. just done a ctrl-f5 and it shows ok now.

sorry about that.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Lol sure hes just glad its done properly now.

 

[Bradley8988]

lol yea. I guess this is cpu limited or crossfire dont scale very well with my result.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Its crossfire scaling mate was bad in the original also. Crytec + Nvidia done a good job of making the engine as bad for ati as they possibly could. I don't think ati really got Crysis to run much better under crossfire so i can't see them having much success in warhead either.

 

[IceWind]

done and dusted think everyting was right this time.

 

[rounddodger]

done and dusted think everyting was right this time.

Awesome score.

 

[Sh4rkie]

done and dusted think everyting was right this time.

Oh my!

 

[Happy]

That quite a lead you have there Icewind

 

[IceWind]

il do the etst again the night along with the other one as my replacement card should be here today so il run it on tri sli.

 

[HummuH1]

That quite a lead you have there Icewind

How are you seeing Icewind's score? Can't see it anywhere in the tables

EDIT: Scrap that, just found it on marc's site. Holy **** that's good.

 

[IceWind]

i think my replacement pump arrives today as well so il put my gpus back in a loop and crank the clocks up. for whatever reason i cant get my qx9650 to run stable at 4.6ghz in crysis considering its stable in prime and every other game i play.

 

[psychas]

41.390 | LEEBONE | intel e6600 @ 3500mhz | nvidia 8800gtx 768mb @ 621/998/1506

look at those 8800gtx still kicks butt

 

[sarge78]

Does anyone else see a patern in the ati 4xxx results? (ignoring all Nvidias for the time being)
In a test like Vantage and a few other banchmarks, a heavly o/c 4850 (with cores over 750) will match or beat standard (even mildly o/c) 4870's but here they seem to be much further back. Is crysis more memory bandwidth limited and we're seeing the use of gddr5 paying off?

Just a thought! I could be full of cr*p
________
RICHIE GINTHER

 

[IceWind]

i will admit that that is a dam impressive score for a pair of gtxs

 

[Adrianr]

Woooo 2nd!! 8800GT's mixing it up with the top (I don't exactly mind coming 2nd to the first place rig!)

 

[RaV]

^ really nice performance, though it does make the results look even more random now..

and the difference between these two just caught my eye.

1 | 65.230 | IceWind | intel qx9650 @ 4200mhz | nvidia gtx 280 1024mb @ 655/1160/1380 | sli | Windows Vista 64bit

3 | 40.240 | Strife212 | intel e6600 @ 3150mhz | nvidia gtx 280 1024mb @ 602/1107/1296 | sli | Windows Vista 64bit

 

[Gerard]

^ really nice performance, though it does make the results look even more random now..

and the difference between these two just caught my eye.

1 | 65.230 | IceWind | intel qx9650 @ 4200mhz | nvidia gtx 280 1024mb @ 655/1160/1380 | sli | Windows Vista 64bit

3 | 40.240 | Strife212 | intel e6600 @ 3150mhz | nvidia gtx 280 1024mb @ 602/1107/1296 | sli | Windows Vista 64bit

Well one score has about £1200 worth of video cards behind it, the other doesn't.

 

[Devious]

Does anyone else see a patern in the ati 4xxx results? (ignoring all Nvidias for the time being)
In a test like Vantage and a few other banchmarks, a heavly o/c 4850 (with cores over 750) will match or beat standard (even mildly o/c) 4870's but here they seem to be much further back. Is crysis more memory bandwidth limited and we're seeing the use of gddr5 paying off?

Im sure the gddr5 is helping a bit, but its only around 3-4 fps @ 1280x1024 and 2fps @ 1680 so its hardly much further back.