|
|
|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
2. November 2012 @ 13:37 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah, totally in agreement Jeff on Spec Ops: The Line. At first I thought it was dumb, because it starts kind of slowly, and it's super easy in the beginning. But then it starts getting tricky and much more challenging.
In general, like in regard to the Stalker Series, and that new RTS - Wargames: European theater was it? - I think you have a lot more patience than I do, to get into those games, even the ones with absolutely no trainers.
The one exception to that - it appears that you lost patience with Far Cry 2 probably because you didn't discover the boating trick.
I don't blame you - if I hadn't discovered the joys of boating around the map, you are absolutely right - big shoot out every mile when you hit a guardpost - and on the way back it has respawned, and you have another big shootout to deal with. I read about one guy who bought demo charges, killed everybody at the guard post, planted the charges, and on the way back detonated, so he was able to make it easy for himself. I don't exactly remember there being charges - probably because I skipped right over them on the gunshot computer.
I also stopped doing the big antenna assignments, because the guy you had to hunt was way over on the other side of the map, and often the riverways didn't go that far. But as long as I was able to stay 70% of the time on the river, life was a breeze, and the scenery was awesome! You got chased by some other boats, but a sniper rifle dealt with them very fast. My loadout of sniper rifle and light machine gun worked perfectly throughout the entire game.
As a general note about MP:
Originally posted by Sam:
The next frame is rendered before the first one is displayed - so what you see on the screen is what happened more than a frame ago - this makes aiming more difficult!
- what did you think about the shocking discovery that vertical sync hurts multiplayer gaming?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
2. November 2012 @ 13:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmmm, another NPB I think.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. November 2012 @ 19:24 |
Link to this message
|
Rich - I already disliked Vsync for its odd impact on game fluidity, but that was the nail in the coffin. It is also known to cause severe performance issues with console ports like Dead Space.
Need for Speed: Most Wanted (2012)
I think 30fps is about all it's realistic to expect from this title for a long time to come.
TEST 1
Certification target: 40fps
SLI Support: No
Crossfire Support: No
AMD HD7900 series not supported at time of testing - retest pending update
1680x1050: Geforce GTX580/660, Radeon HD6970/7870 - 1280MB VRAM required
1920x1080: Geforce GTX660Ti, Radeon HD7870 - 1350MB VRAM required
2560x1600: N/A - 1.5GB VRAM AMD, 1.7GB VRAM nvidia required
Certified CPU: Core i7 3930K
Compliant CPUs: AMD FX-4120/6100/8150, Core i3 2100, i5 760/2300, i7 930/2600
TEST 2
Certification target: 30fps
1680x1050: Geforce GTX470/560Ti/660, Radeon HD5850/6870/7850
1920x1080: Geforce GTX480/570/660, Radeon HD5870/6950/7850
2560x1600: Geforce GTX680 - estimated Radeon HD7970 (untested)
Certified CPUs: AMD FX-4100/6100/8150, Core i3 2100, Core i5 650/760/2300, i7 930/2600
Compliant CPUs: Athlon II X4 620/AMD Phenom II X2 550/X4 920/X6 any, FX any, Core i3 530/i5 650/750/i7 920, Core 2 E8500/Q6850/Q8400/Q9400
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
7. November 2012 @ 15:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Sam :
Rich - I already disliked Vsync for its odd impact on game fluidity, but that was the nail in the coffin. It is also known to cause severe performance issues with console ports like Dead Space.
Well, DDP and Steve were dubious, over on the builder thread, but I certainly don't see myself ever trying Vsync out again - it's hard enough to survive for long against some of these sharpshooters, as it is, without a setting working against you lol.
Rich
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
7. November 2012 @ 16:26 |
Link to this message
|
Vsync is fine for a lot of games and I use it frequently, but it's really down to the hardware being used and the game being played. Most games do not play well with it, but titles with very high FPS usually don't mind it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. November 2012 @ 16:53 |
Link to this message
|
Just got through a very long and tedious process of building a new machine for a LAN this weekend.
Original planned specs were as follows:
CPU: (new) Core i5 3470
RAM: (new) 2x4GB Corsair XMS PC3-12800C9
M/B: (new) Gigabyte H61MA-D3V
GPU: (new) MSI Radeon HD7770
PSU: 2008 Antec EarthWatts 380W
Case: 2006 NZXT Lexa
SSD: 2010 Intel X25-V 40GB
HDD: (undecided)
When the system was assembled, there was no POST despite reseating everything - ignoring the unlikely event of a faulty CPU, when I established that the GPU worked fine in an old system, it was either going to be the board or the RAM - being easier to take apart and into the shop I brought the RAM back first, but there was no issue with it. On returning the board I found out that although the board "supports" Ivy Bridge CPUs on the spec sheet, you can't even POST the system without the BIOS being updated (I later learned this is an Ivy Bridge limitation, not specific to any brand). The board comes with the oldest BIOS on by default, but get this, a BIOS so old, that you can't run the BIOS update utility on it as it's too out of date. So unless you get Gigabyte to personally send you a board with a more recent BIOS pre-flashed or have an old Sandy Bridge CPU to hand, you don't stand a chance, ergo the board does not support Ivy Bridge CPUs as far as I'm concerned.
Being an Asus exclusive partner, this was the highest end Gigabyte board I could get my hands on - they offered me an Asus P8Z77-LX in its place, which I begrudgingly accepted, given I was short on time. Upon installing that, the system did POST and install windows, but in exact time to the activity on the HDD (an SSD only at this stage, no mechanicals), you got a horrendous screeching from the PSU in time/tune to whatever disk I/O was going on - same noise as coil whine, only very loud (50-60dB+).
Additionally if one of the six SATA ports was used in particular, the system would simply power off as soon as the disk was read to load windows - not crashed or rebooted, powered off. Clearly there was some short fault in the ICH. When returned, no fault was found (surprise surprise) but I was given a lecture by the store staff about running an HD7770 with a 380W PSU, below the recommended spec.
Ultimately, I conceded to buying a 500W Corsair CX V2, which was the best inexpensive PSU they had on offer, and I went to the shop next door (yes, Tottenham Court Road is like that!) and bought the sole high-end Gigabyte board they had, a Z77MX-D3H. Have just installed that, and so far so good.
My luck with Asus does not seem to be improving, does it?
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
8. November 2012 @ 03:52 |
Link to this message
|
Have run much higher end/more power hungry cards than a 7770 on an Antec Earthwatts 380 for extended periods of time. 9800GTX+ OC, 4890 being the two that come to mind. So it seems somewhat fishy for the PSU to be a problem unless bogged down with HDDs.
BTW, I thought you already had a fairly capable LAN PC??? Is this going to be a new machine or is it a replacement/update to an existing unit? Many of the parts I recognize from previous machines. Obviously wasn't an expensive project... If a replacement, what's being replaced?
What influenced the choice to go Ivy Bridge? Aren't there still plenty of SB CPUs floating around or was it specifically intended to stay stock and take advantage of Ivy Bridge's small improvements?
Just curious, more details plz...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just for the record, am not finding myself in need of any new hardware, but lining it all up anyway. Due to several pending business deals, I will be finding myself with a surplus of brand-new hardware due to swapping.
Next purchases/acquisitions will be:
- 1090T/1100T new or used, any price, this is happening for sure, either used from a friend, or I will be paying a stupid price for one :P
- Newer Gigabyte motherboard if used 1090T can be secured. Has a fairly high end board included, purchased last month.
- Possibly looking at 6970 from a friend, with intent to find a second for Crossfire, while enjoying slightly higher FPS overall and removing memory limitations. Bit miffed as 7000 series remains stupid expensive, but 6000 series is OOP/EOL. So finding a second card might be a chore.
- New PSU. 2008 Seasonic-built 620HX is still pulling strong, bless its soul, but reporting lower voltages than it had for several years. Not a good sign. Time for a replacement.
- 1 or 2 new HDDs to replace my old-timers.
- New Cooler, preferably a known quantity better than the Cool-It Eco. Considering Thermaltake Frio after several hours of research and reading reviews. The Cool-It simply does not agree with this environment.
- Several changes to airflow to accommodate using air cooling again. Have been running without a side panel for a month or so now and enjoying lower temps, so a side intake modification for the video cards is in the works.
^Could use some feedback on this guys^
What's frustrating is that my current video cards have plenty of processing power for any game, but are limited by their memory. Simply having 2GB each would eliminate my need to upgrade them. As it is, there are already a few games I would like to play but have avoided simply due to memory limits. Currently I stand to gain more from the extra memory of a 6970 than I stand to lose from the slight decrease in overall power. Also eliminates Crossfire scaling issues which the HD6800 series was plagued with. Should be a tidy upgrade over all when CPU/Video/Mobo upgrades are combined. Not to mention my chances at a better OC by far.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2012 @ 04:27
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
8. November 2012 @ 04:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
There are obvious gains in running the 1090t over the 965 Black. If you can acquire one, I'd say $250 is well spent. Much more than that though, and the seller is taking advantage...
I don't regret my purchase :D
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
8. November 2012 @ 04:40 |
Link to this message
|
Well there are plenty of them available. Amazon has several 1090s and 1100s listed from different sellers. If buying new it would be obvious to choose Intel, but as it currently stands I can get within the ballpark of Intel while retaining most of my current hardware.
Am willing to pay up to $300 for one but hoping I wont have to pay a dime if all goes well. Sneaky business practices but not questionable enough to illicit guilt :P
My 955BE will simply not hold an OC properly anymore, so something needs to change there. Hoping to address everything all at once with PSU/Mobo/CPU being replaced. 955BE going off to a good home and staying stock.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2012 @ 04:45
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
8. November 2012 @ 10:37 |
Link to this message
|
Jeff:
The machine is being built to serve as a lightweight LAN PC - prior to the rackmount rebuild I used to take my server in a travel case when making the 400 mile round trip to York for our LANs, but now it's in a 4U case and weighs significantly more, that's no longer remotely realistic.
The main games PC is simlarly immobile due to its size, so a new PC build was in order, as of the other two machines, the E5200 is now at work, and the E4300 is a bit long in the tooth for the job given that the P31 board only supports a max of 2GB of RAM!
I was on the fence about Ivy Bridge, take it or leave it, but the fact that it's the same price as Sandy Bridge meant I saw no reason not to buy the more recent CPU, that plus stock of the IB CPUs is a little more prevalent in high street stores, which is where all the new parts for this build have come from. The lack of decent boards available from such stores is the reason for the mayhem in the first place.
If you want a side intake, have it lower down - unless you run a heavy OC or your CPU cooler is weak (as I understand it, neither apply to you), your GPU/chipset area needs more cooling than higher up the case. Place a large fan (minimum 120mm) centred so that the hub is around the same height as the gap between the two graphics cards, or perhaps higher if the chipset suffers heat issues a lot.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
14. November 2012 @ 16:26 |
Link to this message
|
Call of Duty: Black Ops 2
SLI Support: No
Crossfire Support: Yes (55%)
GTX680: 1920x1200 Certified, 2560x1600 Compliant
GTX670: 1680x1050 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
GTX660Ti: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
GTX660: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1080 Compliant
GTX650Ti: 1366x768 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
GTX650: 1024x600 Certified, 1024x768 Compliant
HD7970GE: 1920x1080 Certified, 2560x1440 Compliant
HD7970: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
HD7950: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1080 Compliant
HD7870: 1440x900 Certified, 1600x900 Compliant
HD7850: 1366x768 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
HD7770: 1024x600 Certified, 1024x768 Compliant
HD7750: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
Certified CPUs:
AMD Athlon II X4 (any), Phenom II (any X4 or X6)
Intel Core i-series (any), Core 2 Duo E8500, Core 2 Quad Q6850/8400
Compliant CPUs: Athlon64 X2 5200+, Pentium E5200/Core 2 Duo E6700
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
14. November 2012 @ 16:46 |
Link to this message
|
Oh dear...
CRYSIS 3 ALPHA - HIGH:
SLI Support: 52%
Crossfire Support: No
GTX690: 1920x1200 Certified, 2560x1600 Compliant
GTX680: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
GTX670: 1440x900 Certified, 1680x1050 Compliant
GTX660Ti: 1440x900 Certified, 1680x1050 Compliant
GTX660: 1366x768 Certified, 1600x900 Compliant
GTX650Ti: 1024x600 Certified, 1366x768 Compliant
GTX650: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7970GE: 1680x1050 Certified, 1920x1440 Compliant
HD7970: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
HD7950: 1440x900 Certified, 1920x1080 Compliant
HD7870: 1366x768 Certified, 1600x900 Compliant
HD7850: 1280x720 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
HD7770: 1024x600 Certified, 1280x720 Compliant
HD7750: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
CRYSIS 3 ALPHA - VERY HIGH:
SLI Support: 90%
Crossfire Support: No
GTX690: 1280x720 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
GTX680: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX670: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX660Ti: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX660: 640x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
GTX650Ti: 512x384 Certified, 640x480 Compliant
GTX650: 320x240 Certified, 512x384 Compliant
HD7970GE: 1024x600 Certified, 1024x768 Compliant
HD7970: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7950: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7870: 853x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
HD7850: 640x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
HD7770: 512x384 Certified, 640x480 Compliant
HD7750: 320x240 Certified, 512x384 Compliant
Video memory requirements:
HIGH: 1.5GB @ 1680x1050/1920x1080, 2GB @ 2560x1600
VHI: 2GB @ 1680x1050/1920x1080, 2GB @ 2560x1600 (nvidia), 3GB @ 2560x1600 (AMD)
Certified CPUs:
AMD: (None)
Intel: Core i5 750/2500K+, Core i7 920/2600+, Core 2 Quad QX9770
Compliant CPUs:
AMD: FX-8150/8300, FX-6130/6300, Phenom II X4 975BE
Intel: Core i5 750/2500K, i7 920/2600+, Core 2 Q6700/8400
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
14. November 2012 @ 20:46 |
Link to this message
|
The fan is placed exactly where it needs to be, over the video cards and overlapping the lower chipset cooler, 140mm ;P
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. November 2012 @ 20:48
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
15. November 2012 @ 06:51 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Oh dear...
CRYSIS 3 ALPHA - HIGH:
SLI Support: 52%
Crossfire Support: No
GTX690: 1920x1200 Certified, 2560x1600 Compliant
GTX680: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
GTX670: 1440x900 Certified, 1680x1050 Compliant
GTX660Ti: 1440x900 Certified, 1680x1050 Compliant
GTX660: 1366x768 Certified, 1600x900 Compliant
GTX650Ti: 1024x600 Certified, 1366x768 Compliant
GTX650: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7970GE: 1680x1050 Certified, 1920x1440 Compliant
HD7970: 1600x900 Certified, 1920x1200 Compliant
HD7950: 1440x900 Certified, 1920x1080 Compliant
HD7870: 1366x768 Certified, 1600x900 Compliant
HD7850: 1280x720 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
HD7770: 1024x600 Certified, 1280x720 Compliant
HD7750: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
CRYSIS 3 ALPHA - VERY HIGH:
SLI Support: 90%
Crossfire Support: No
GTX690: 1280x720 Certified, 1440x900 Compliant
GTX680: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX670: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX660Ti: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
GTX660: 640x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
GTX650Ti: 512x384 Certified, 640x480 Compliant
GTX650: 320x240 Certified, 512x384 Compliant
HD7970GE: 1024x600 Certified, 1024x768 Compliant
HD7970: 800x600 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7950: 853x480 Certified, 1024x600 Compliant
HD7870: 853x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
HD7850: 640x480 Certified, 800x600 Compliant
HD7770: 512x384 Certified, 640x480 Compliant
HD7750: 320x240 Certified, 512x384 Compliant
Video memory requirements:
HIGH: 1.5GB @ 1680x1050/1920x1080, 2GB @ 2560x1600
VHI: 2GB @ 1680x1050/1920x1080, 2GB @ 2560x1600 (nvidia), 3GB @ 2560x1600 (AMD)
Certified CPUs:
AMD: (None)
Intel: Core i5 750/2500K+, Core i7 920/2600+, Core 2 Quad QX9770
Compliant CPUs:
AMD: FX-8150/8300, FX-6130/6300, Phenom II X4 975BE
Intel: Core i5 750/2500K, i7 920/2600+, Core 2 Q6700/8400
reminds me of the first Crysis all over again, the nostalgia is bringing tears to my eye's.
Powered By
 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. November 2012 @ 07:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm not sure that's the sort of nostalgia I want :p
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
15. November 2012 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
Also consider this is without proper Multi-GPU support and is in Alpha. I remember BF3 running similarly horrible as compared to the full game. Even the single GPU numbers aren't representative of the full game. Though I imagine it will be the most demanding Crysis yet. Still to be seen if the graphics justify it. But considering Crytek's hit and miss track record, it's probably still not going to truly top Crysis 1. The Art direction is the most important factor here.
Also consider Crysis 2's performance was hardly consistent or dependable, basically programmed to give you performance based on brand and model number. Particularly HD6800 series cards got screwed for no reason while HD6900s were fine... Not to mention that little tessellation debacle.
I'll be more interested to see what can be coaxed out of it with tweaking. I was able to make solid gains of 50% in particular areas of Crysis 1 without even adjusting graphics related settings.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 15. November 2012 @ 13:02
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
15. November 2012 @ 15:16 |
Link to this message
|
It should be noted that for minimum frame rate, the Crysis 3 Alpha results are effectively identical to the original Crysis in DX10, Very High, with 8xAA enabled.
To get the same average frame rate however commands 70% more performance from the GPU than Crysis 1 did with 8xAA at max. Anti-aliasing is being used in the Crysis 3 Alpha tests, but what level is undisclosed. From the quality of the image it must be at least 4x, probably 8x.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
15. November 2012 @ 15:37 |
Link to this message
|
Which leaves the results a bit skewed as Crysis historically sucks with AA. I imagine performance will be drastically different without. Personally I will be playing at very high without AA, on the full build, with Crossfire support, so that's a factor for me. As of right now it doesn't seem any more daunting than Crysis 1 or 2. Should be tons of room to tweak it and get some extra FPS out of it for relatively little trade-off.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
16. November 2012 @ 01:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Sam:
Call of Duty: Black Ops 2
HD7970GE: 1920x1080 Certified, 2560x1440 Compliant
Sam, as I recall, certified means average of 60, and compliant means what - average of 30? or minimum at least 30 and up? Sorry to have forgotten.
But I just played the single player, and I got better performance that that - however you are no doubt referring to the multiplayer, which I believe you have said stresses the graphics more than single player.
Since I re-enabled crossfire - (why did I do that - I forget) - I played through the single player of black ops ii in an all-nighter, hardest difficulty to slow down tearing through it, with both 7950s stock. I maxed everything, including 8xAA, max draw distance, but I think I left corpses at medium, lol. I was running my OSD and getting 50-60 fps, but one-half hour in I crashed. I turned off the OSD and pulled the all-nighter, 8-10 hours straight. I checked the gpu-z log file and I recall it showing fps above 60. Again, the cards were stock, 800 mhz, memory 1250. It was totally fluid.
So for 2560x1600 gaming, that seems to be slightly better than what you showed on your chart - but again, single player, not multi-player. In the next week or two I might try out multiplayer for a few hours to see if I like the maps.
For the single player - there was one standout campaign, out of the 8 or 10 that make up the game. This was Afghanistan, with horses. That was a kick. I haven't ridden a horse since Call of Juarez, and it was fun and different, and really felt authentic.
It also made it easier to get around the battlefield despite the foot soldiers trying to nail me - and blow up the various tanks, helicopters, etc. I would re-play that campaign.
The rest was okay - but, sorry to report, not nearly as good as Black Ops the original, nor World at War, both of which had that very interesting Russian character who added so much to the story - and both of which I enjoyed quite a bit. They did bring Woods back, the flamboyant character from Black Ops - I think he's the one who said "You're in Nam baby" and he was good - but the rest of the character acting was not as strong as the Russian I mentioned.
The main villain, Raul Menendez, was used a lot - you even take him over a couple times - at one point they gave him about triple normal life and you are in a total rage, roaring in anger, and shooting and hacking your way through a lot of American CIA soldiers in a covert operation in Panama, while he is trying to get to his sister, badly burned in childhood, to ensure her safety. And then later you played a CIA operative, deep undercover in the Raul Menendez upper ranks, who also has to kill a lot of Americans to get to the special meeting place.
Does this all sound like the airport massacre in MW3?
So Treyarch is trying to put out some good stuff - but OF: Red River was better. Still, for $50, I guess I would say it is worth it - it is as good as the new Medal of Honor. Again, I'm just going by the single player.
Graphics-wise: pretty good I think. Not as good as any of the crysis titles. Just as good as MOH Warfighter. There is some river stuff - some flooding. The water was okay - not super great - but quite passable. By comparison, the very short river stuff in MOH was more dramatic - those black hurricane rolling river waters were intense - too bad you were barrelling along at breakneck speed and didn't have more time to enjoy the drama of it. Similarly here - some vehicle action that isn't bad - but passes too quickly.
Some of the stuff is throwback to the 90s, some of it is futuristic to 2025. Hillary Clinton under another name is President. Patraeus under his own name is Secretary of State. That was short, but fun and interesting. The futuristic weapons were kind of cool - one of them paints the enemy targets with a red diamond - I have seen that before but I forget when. How would a weapon know an enemy from a friend - unless maybe all soldiers by then, or at least friendlies, had an imbedded microchip identifier. I suppose it's possible.
I hope to report on Multiplayer within the next 10 days. I will be awaiting Respawn's new title with high anticipation. LOL
Regarding your other report, Sam, on Crysis 3 Alpha, and your various comments, Jeff, I am glad to see they will use all 3 gigs of AMD's memory like with the other titles, speaking of 2560x1600 resolution, which might mean nice textures.
I might end up depending on your tweaks, Jeff, but ultimately I bet I will be able to handle it, even if I have to crank up both cards to the 975 stable overclock, hoping it doesn't max all my cpu cores like Sleeping Dogs did. (Speaking of - I went back to Sleeping Dogs for a short couple of hours, to the 4.5 gig free DLC download mildly interesting horror version. It was entertaining for a bit, but I have now deleted all local steam content, so goodbye karate.)
Rich
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
16. November 2012 @ 02:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
Rich -
Compliant: Average 60fps - i.e. the card is sufficiently powerful to deliver an acceptable experience
Certified: Minimum 60fps - i.e. the card is sufficiently powerful to deliver a smooth experience throughout
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. November 2012 @ 02:50
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
16. November 2012 @ 04:38 |
Link to this message
|
And here I am playing 10 year old flight sims and fee to play MMOs. lol What a waste of this power. Will change I'm sure when I bother to get BF3 Premium and upon the arrival of Crysis 3. Am happy with a minimum of 30 in CryEngine games which provides more wiggle room.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
17. November 2012 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
Hey Jeff, I was thinking about those old games you are playing, and you're the guy who clued me in to so many great games.
And then a light went off in my feeble brain.
With your 2.3 million pixels vs my 4 million pixels, which I had forgotten about, one $300 7950 with 3 gigs memory, will handle all this stuff for you, especially with your tweaking ways, lol. You said you need at least 60 - well I just got at least 60 on Black Ops with crossfire - and Sam said my crossfire was only 55% effective on second card - so you'll get 60 for sure with the one card. Same for crysis 3. If stock won't do it, crank it up past 800 as far as 975 stable as a rock. Remember, in all my 7950 testing, I tore through all 3 crysis titles with one card at max graphic settings - and never felt a bit of lag - snow ice nothing phased it or slowed it down. I attribute that to the max memory, and huge number of shader streams.
I like the HIS IceQ. Newegg has a nice video on it.
Remember I tested power color, gigabyte, and xfx. Stock is 800, mem 1250, vddc I think 981. For stock I like 800, 1250, but 1012 (somewhere along the way I decided that 981 is slightly skinny and 1012 more stable.) For max overclock I found 975, 1350, and 1087 to work great - that's the setting that tore up all the crysis titles!
The thing will hardly overheat - the cooling is so good, covering all the memory too, and single turbine design blowing most of it all out the back. I use Trixx custom fan setting like you, but a straight line from 0 to 80 - because around 75 degrees = 75% tach gives a fan speed close to a fairly quiet 2900 rpm (max fan is 3150 rpm where you will hear it whine - so this setting will keep it under 70 most of the time, and silent.)
There have been some bad reviews - so test test test in the first 30 newegg full return period - I would get the $24 3dmark11 - oh I think you already have it - you were the one that talked about the submersibles. Test on that, Heaven of course, maybe furmark for just a bit. Then game like crazy for 30 days.
With 3 gigs, if you don't get fluid everything at full settings, I'll eat my hat! (Or I'll pay the shipping back if it's defective, or the shipping plus half of the 15% restocking, if it's not defective, but you are not fully satisfied.) Keep the box - it's the most beautiful graphics card box I have ever seen, no lie. LOL
Rich
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
17. November 2012 @ 06:50 |
Link to this message
|
You do realise Rich that how far anything will overclock (CPU, GPU etc.) is completely luck of the draw? Your results will make sense for that card, but those of another card of even the same brand will be totally different.
Also, if only using a single card, you're going to have to make some serious quality sacrifices to get Crysis 3 playing smoothly. If you set the bar at 30fps it'll be a lot easier, of course.
|
|
harvardguy
Member
|
17. November 2012 @ 22:59 |
Link to this message
|
Wow, I looked at those crysis 3 numbers more closely, Holy Mackeral!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regarding the overclock, I'm going a lot on what Blaze said when he said 975 puts the 7950 at the same level as the 7970 at stock 925 clock. Some of the cards were supposed to overclock wayyy better, like even 1100 or 1200, but several had said the HIS IceQ wasn't a super overclocker for some reason (maybe it was voltage control - I was quite attracted to that mil spec MSI 7970 Lightning at 1040 clock, with the daughter card fixed to the back for voltage stability on further overclock.)
Anyway, all the cards that I tested achieved the 975 without much problem - just sayin'
Okay, well we'll see if I can play Crysis 3 at max - a challenge is coming!!! LOL
(BTW - how is the repair on your 30" dell holding up? - I assume it's still working)
Rich
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
17. November 2012 @ 23:17 |
Link to this message
|
Overclocking a GPU. Hmm... I don't think I'd do it :p
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
