• 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.

Speculated Crysis Performance - ATI & Nvidia Cards

Cyber-Mav said:
why is that?

i hope your not trying to say cpu limitation, because if there is cpu limitation then the fps should remain the same at all the resolutions they predicted.
since the fps drop as the rez is increase its not cpu limitation its gfx card limitation. :rolleyes: (rolleyes only applies if u thought it was cpu limitation :p )
Click to expand...

Which just highlights the difference between these figures and what is likely to be the real figures...
 
How can you state a "predicted" framerate? What is that based on? The fact that they use the word predicted hints that they didn't do any testing on an actual game build and so those numbers are most likely fabricated based on tech specs, which we know mean very little in real world performance.

I think the fact that they put "actual performance may vary" raises the question of what use is this to anyone, ever?
 
willhub said:
That cant be right, 7600GS beating an X850 :confused:
Click to expand...

DX9.0c...

As to how the 'prediction' works, it's probably vaguely similar to the way Valve brought out the Source benchmark before the actual game. A reflection of actual performance rather than a direct indicator, but no less valid for it.

Of course, due to the nature of the internet, the benchmarks may be rubbish and - in the same way - even if they aren't, those who don't want to believe them will denounce them as such.
 
Quake4 running at 1280*1024 4xAA Ultra already uses 616MB of video RAM, I seriously suspect that games in the future will utilize 1GB of video RAM.
 
Tom NBK how dare you steal my post from the PC Gaming forum grrrr

Original Topic: Link

EDIT: Didnt see your thankyou at the end of your post :p Cheers for referring back to my post :D
 
A few things to consider.....

  • These are all low res projections
  • It doesn't mention any AA or AF
  • The CPU speed/type should have an influence with the physics in this game
  • All of the 2900XT fps are exactly 10 more than the 8800GTX in every case
  • SLI/crossfire will both scale exactly the same, as they both give exactly a 20fps increase at all resolutions

I think that the reality will no doubt be a lot different, and I'm sure that both nvidia and ATI will be releasing optimized drivers right before this game is released.
 
spb251272 said:
A few things to consider.....

  • These are all low res projections
  • It doesn't mention any AA or AF
  • The CPU speed/type should have an influence with the physics in this game
  • All of the 2900XT fps are exactly 10 more than the 8800GTX in every case
  • SLI/crossfire will both scale exactly the same, as they both give exactly a 20fps increase at all resolutions

I think that the reality will no doubt be a lot different, and I'm sure that both nvidia and ATI will be releasing optimized drivers right before this game is released.
Click to expand...


Mate they are only guesses, dont start critising the table just because it isnt accurate, im guessing that Crytek predict that future ATI drivers wil push the 2900XT past the 8800GTX ;)
 
I'm not criticising the table, just pointing out it's shortfalls and potential inaccuracies.

It's quite funny because before the 2900XT came out, most people were trying to predict by how much it would thrash the 8800GTX. Then it was launched with much lower than expected performance, and now it's like, well it was a disappointment in dx9, but it's going to kick ass in dx10. I may be wrong, but is anyone getting deja vu?
 
No, not really, since these are speculated results which are probably based on nothing. Nobody will know if the X2900 XT will beat the GTX in DX10 apps until a real game is released.

Someone needs to add this to the first post:

spec·u·late
v. spec·u·lat·ed, spec·u·lat·ing, spec·u·lates
1. To engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence.
2. To assume to be true without conclusive evidence.
 
psychas said:
i told everyone i will get 80+ maybe 100 of fps and nobody believed in me :eek:
Click to expand...

And you wonder why no one will belive anything you say?

I dont believe the HD2900XT or 8800 series will get the performance that is shown in that picture tho.
 
I don't believe for a second that the FPS figures will be anything near those projections, I could sit here and speculate too and post some numbers up but in reality it just means nothing at all.
 
Looking at the scores the 1152 scores are always 5fps lower than 1024 and the 1280 scores are always 10fps lower than the 1152 scores, if it is SLI, a slow card or a fast card which seems a little strange.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom