BF2 Benchmarks? ATI X800XL or 6800GT?

[pappadj]

The BF2 demo is out, has anyone benchmarked it and compared the ATI vs Nvidia as far as which one is going to perform better with this game?

 

[Tab]

How would you like to benchmark it?

1.8Ghz AMD 64
1GB Ram
X800XL

I'd more interested in someone benchmarking F.E.A.R

 

[ryanv12]

Well, I think you'll see reviewers (maybe Anandtech) give you a "BF2 Performance Guide" of some sort in the coming weeks that will probably address your question.

I'll say now though, if BF2 is like the previous BF games, it will run better on ATI hardware.

 

[pappadj]

Originally posted by: Tab
How would you like to benchmark it?

I'm guessing FRAPS but I haven't looked into other benchmark utilities yet to see if there is a better one.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: pappadj

Originally posted by: Tab
How would you like to benchmark it?

I'm guessing FRAPS but I haven't looked into other benchmark utilities yet to see if there is a better one.

Yea, but what do you want me to do? Just stand there? :|

 

[pappadj]

No go ahead and play for a little. There should be a log of the stats. I would like to see if it can maintain 30fps

Here's the setup if you wouldn't mind

1600 x 1200
4xaa 4xaf
all in game settings set to high.

You should have some output like this
Frames: XXXX - Time: XXXXXms - Avg: XX.XXX - Min: XX - Max: XX

I appreciate you running it.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Tab

I'd more interested in someone benchmarking F.E.A.R

F.E.A.R.

"A number of sophisticated special effects, including realistic water, soft shadows and reflections, make this game ? based on a new engine from Monolith ? a highly demanding application. We could only squeeze 48fps [at 1024x768] out of the GeForce 6800 Ultra at the maximum graphics quality settings. The cards of the RADEON X800 and X850 families have worse results probably because the game makes use of the special features of the NV4x architecture, particularly UltraShadow II technology."

 

[whoster69]

I'd love to see some benchmarks on Battlefield 2! I'm a HUGE fan of Battlefield 1942 and so far I really like the demo of Battlefield 2. I'm just about ready to upgrade and am planning on getting a 6800GT at this point. If there was a big difference in either quality or framerate, I might reconsider...

 

[pappadj]

I ran into this thread so far. It's not going to be a completley fair comparison to the X800XL as he is running the 3500+ with 2GB of Ram on a diff MBD but if Tab's benchies are comparable we could make an assumption.

http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/sho...0273&page=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=all&vc=1

One thing to note is how well the SLI helps this game.... X800XL needs to really kick 30fps with these settings or I may just go SLI... it'll be a tough call as the Crossfire is always around the corner.

 

[Jeff7181]

I'd do it with my 6800GT but my monitor doesn't support 1600x1200.

BTW... can BF2 do timedemos?

 

[pappadj]

Jeff, could you run it at 1024x768? I don't know about time demos though. Hmmm... that would be a better comparison as one could be running in a desert with nothing around and the other could be in a Harrier battle with enemy tanks firing... there would be a slight difference in the frames, think?

You have AGP, 1GB of Memory plus a 3500+ cpu right, with the Neo2 board in your sig right?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: pappadj
Jeff, could you run it at 1024x768? I don't know about time demos though. Hmmm... that would be a better comparison as one could be running in a desert with nothing around and the other could be in a Harrier battle with enemy tanks firing... there would be a slight difference in the frames, think?

You have AGP, 1GB of Memory plus a 3500+ cpu right, with the Neo2 board in your sig right?

Yeah 3500+ @ 2.6... 6800GT @ 400/1050... RAM is at 187 MHz 2-3-3-10

 

[Jeff7181]

2005-06-11 19:35:42 - BF2
Frames: 2451 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 40.850 - Min: 25 - Max: 71

2005-06-11 19:38:54 - BF2
Frames: 2345 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 39.083 - Min: 31 - Max: 83

Single player... 1024x768@60Hz... 4XAA/8XAF... trilinear forced in drivers with all optimizations turned off... all in game settings maxed.

Venice @ 2.6... 1GB RAM @ 187 MHz 2-3-3-10... AGP 6800GTOC @ 400/1050

 

[pappadj]

that's pretty cool Jeff thanks for the results

Now to get some comparisons with the x800xl

 

[Insomniak]

Rig:
A64 3500+
1GB DDR400
6600GT


Detail Settings:
1024x768x32
Medium/High detail on all settings
2xAA/High Texture Filtering


Performance:
FPS: Smooth

 

[PerfeK]

Originally posted by: ryanv12
Well, I think you'll see reviewers (maybe Anandtech) give you a "BF2 Performance Guide" of some sort in the coming weeks that will probably address your question.

I'll say now though, if BF2 is like the previous BF games, it will run better on ATI hardware.

BF2 is Nvidia stamped though.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: pappadj
link

One thing to note is how well the SLI helps this game.... X800XL needs to really kick 30fps with these settings or I may just go SLI... it'll be a tough call as the Crossfire is always around the corner.

My SLi results were a bit off from his. Granted, he's using a 3500+ and 2x Ultras (plus 2GB of ram vs mine), compared to my 3000+ and 2x GTs.

I ran it 10x and averaged the results. The reason is because the runs varied so much, depending on what happened in game. One time artillery fire was nailing me. On another I was dead for a good 15 seconds. Another I changed the View in the Hummer to follow and the dust kicked up from the tank in front of me and caused it to drop a little. etc, etc. But I pretty much never did the same thing twice, so this is a good sampling.

Average of all 10 runs:
2005-06-11 23:11:17 - BF2
Frames: 3508 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 54 - Min: 29 - Max: 80

Best run:
2005-06-11 23:03:36 - BF2
Frames: 3562 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 59.367 - Min: 43 - Max: 89

Worst run:
2005-06-11 23:05:33 - BF2
Frames: 2710 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 45.167 - Min: 21 - Max: 62

One glaring difference between my results and his was the MIN framerate. He shows 52 as a low. Mine (averaged) is much lower.

 

[pappadj]

I expect stats to be off, it's the potential that's good to know. Running the 10 benchmarks at what about 2 min a piece and giving avg and worst/best runs is a perfect benchmark solution until a true time demo comes out. I'm guessing you also ran it at:

1600 x 1200
4xaa 4xaf
all in game settings set to high.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Yes. Using the drivers included with BF2 and the default profile for BF2 (except forcing 4x AA/AF in the profile).

 

[xtknight]

Leadtek Geforce 6800NU, stock 325/600
Clocks: 400/750 MHz (effective)
I could have benchmarked it higher, but seeing as BF2 is intense, I didn't want to rape my card more than need be.

ForceWare settings:

AA: App controlled
AF: App controlled
Image settings: Quality

BF2 settings:

Everything high, viewing distance 100%. 1152x864 4xAA. For some reason it wouldn't let me choose 1280x1024. I don't know what AF it was set to. There's no option for that and it was set at app-controlled in the ForceWare control panel.

My Fraps log (10 minutes of gameplay, rough at the beginning which is why I have zero).

2005-06-12 01:05:21 - BF2
Frames: 30602 - Time: 600000ms - Avg: 51.003 - Min: 0 - Max: 100

But looking at my detailed FPS log, I can say it was about 40-62 FPS for me, discarding the outliers.