FARCRY 2 cpu benchmark

[Tempered81]

Using a GTX280 OC



I7 965 EE @ 3.2ghz

Core 2 quad QX9770 @ 3.2ghz

Core 2 duo E8500 @ 3.16ghz (40mhz slower )


http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...wyLCxoZW50aGlzdWFzdA==

 

[geoffry]

1920X1440? I don't think I've seen that before.

Do they really mean 1920X1200?

 

[Tempered81]

4:3 aspect ratio

 

[JPB]

Nice review. Reading now :thumbsup:

Thanks

 

[SlowSpyder]

Wow, looks like quads have a real advantage over duals in this game. I wish they would have included some AMD stuff.

 

[JPB]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Wow, looks like quads have a real advantage over duals in this game. I wish they would have included some AMD stuff.

As the resolution gets higher though, not much of a difference. But for all lower resolutions, Quad takes it easy.

 

[edplayer]

that is probably a misprint (1920x1200) even though it is a 4:3 ratio

 

[MarcVenice]

Originally posted by: edplayer


that is probably a misprint (1920x1200) even though it is a 4:3 ratio

It's not a misprint, it used to be a common resolution on older CRT screens. It exists ... It's a step up from 1600*1200. It's a 4:3 ratio like someone else allready said.

This benchmarks confirms my suspicions, I can skimp on the CPU, and get a e7200 for 2/3rd of the price of a e8400, and OC it and not notice any difference.

 

[the unknown]

How do you come to that conclusion? The way I see it, is it seems to correlate with cache differences. e7200 has half the cache of e8400..

 

[LumbergTech]

no one seems to be addressing the most bizarre issue..

core i7 is slower than the core 2 duo..maybe im missing something?

 

[Stoneburner]

Umm... how is this a good thing? It just shows that gaming at PROPER resolutions and settings is heavily GPU biased. Then again, we don't see what the minimum framerates are for the respective CPU's.

Does anybody really care about 640x480?

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: LumbergTech
no one seems to be addressing the most bizarre issue..

core i7 is slower than the core 2 duo..maybe im missing something?

Thats exactly what i was thinking, thats very disapointing.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
It's not a misprint, it used to be a common resolution on older CRT screens. It exists ... It's a step up from 1600*1200. It's a 4:3 ratio like someone else allready said.

This benchmarks confirms my suspicions, I can skimp on the CPU, and get a e7200 for 2/3rd of the price of a e8400, and OC it and not notice any difference.

Did you notice at the bottom where they wrote:

"From 1600x1200 with 2xAA up in FarCry 2 I think it is safe to say the game is GPU limited in our GeForce GTX 280 configuration. There is room to argue about 1920x1400 0xAA still being CPU limited, but not much."


yea, its a misprint. Too much smoking, not enough concentration

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: LumbergTech
no one seems to be addressing the most bizarre issue..

core i7 is slower than the core 2 duo..maybe im missing something?

Thats exactly what i was thinking, thats very disapointing.

It seems to me that it would be nice if we knew the CPU utilization during the bench runs.

How many threads does FarCry 2 spawn? Is it just 2? (must be in order for the dual-core to do so well relative to the others)

It would also be nice if just for comparison sake they turned off SMT on the i7 and then locked the thread affinity to just two cores for both the i7 and the yorkfield just to show us how much of the performance delta in the existing graphs comes from thread migration and cache thrashing.

Wouldn't change the validity of the results, would just go towards helping shed some light on why the dual-core did so much better than the i7.

 

[amenx]

I dont know why we rarely see very heavily CPU dependent games in benchmarks, ie, FSX. I'd be more interested in the i7 performance in this one.

 

[vj8usa]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
How many threads does FarCry 2 spawn? Is it just 2? (must be in order for the dual-core to do so well relative to the others)

It would also be nice if just for comparison sake they turned off SMT on the i7 and then locked the thread affinity to just two cores for both the i7 and the yorkfield just to show us how much of the performance delta in the existing graphs comes from thread migration and cache thrashing.

Wouldn't change the validity of the results, would just go towards helping shed some light on why the dual-core did so much better than the i7.

Look again - the dual core CPU performs significantly worse than the quad core CPUs (at least at lower, more CPU limited resolutions). It almost certainly spawns more than 2 threads.

 

[450R]

Originally posted by: edplayer
Did you notice at the bottom where they wrote:

"From 1600x1200 with 2xAA up in FarCry 2 I think it is safe to say the game is GPU limited in our GeForce GTX 280 configuration. There is room to argue about 1920x1400 0xAA still being CPU limited, but not much."

yea, its a misprint. Too much smoking, not enough concentration

Uh, how does that make it a misprint? You proved yourself wrong. Better luck next time?

 

[edplayer]

Try reading it again, real slowly if you have to

 

[450R]

I read your posts well enough but I didn't think I'd have to hold your hand. The quote you pasted is a misprint, but not because they meant 1920x1200. Your argument is that 1920x1440 should be 1920x1200 in those charts, and you're wrong.

 

[Idontcare]

I'm going to nominate this thread FTL if you two are pissing on each other's shoes over the entirely non-value-add fact that while the resolution was in fact 1920x1440 they misprinted and wrote 1400 instead of 1440.

 

[n7]

They use a 30" for testing, which means they can use pretty much any resolution out there below 2560x1600, including 1920x1440

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: n7
They use a 30" for testing, which means they can use pretty much any resolution out there below 2560x1600, including 1920x1440

If they had mentioned what monitor they were using it would help - for example the Dell 300X series doesn't do 1920 x 1440.

The other problem with Farcry 2 is that it isn't heavily enough threaded -

FarCry 2 consistently reaches into 40% of my available processor cycles

and that is just with the core 2 quad (and a 4870X2) - 40% = <2 cores fully used.

 

[sunnn]

prescott? sorry cant help. beginning to look like it.
better spend money on new gpu and wait/use stream/cuda/badaboom w/e. then you address your gaming and media needs.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
If they had mentioned what monitor they were using it would help - for example the Dell 300X series doesn't do 1920 x 1440.

Oh?