Originally posted by: djayjp
Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
1. so what card according to your math would give my system the best performance/$$ to play cod3 @ 16x10 @ 8xaa 8xaf
see the system in my signature (minus the video card of course) for reference.
2. same question as above, but what if my system had a Pentium D 3.2ghz?
3. What card according to your math would give best performance/$$ to play cod3 @ 16x10 @ 0xaa 0xaf
Thanks for the question!
1) Unfortunately, I can't give you DIRECT numbers of these newer cards being run on COD3... COD4 is another matter entirely, however. The best approach would be to estimate based on statistics the average decrease in performance of vid cards going from COD3 to COD4. Then adapt that over to the new benchmarks using the new cards and COD4 at that rez.
However, COD4 is a very non-challenging game to run even at #1's settings, fully maxed out (and of course COD4 is significantly more challenging to run than COD3). At the link below, you can see that the 4670 achieves buttery smooth 57fps at 16x10 w/ 4xaa and 8xaf.
The beauty of my method also is that instead of doing this uber detailed analysis looking at game after game, you can just look at the overall optimal price/performance ratio if you want-- so, due to the insane ratio of the 4670 for only $60 after rebate, I can't recommend going any lower than that (the 9500gt costs $5 less and offers almost 3x worse performance!). For your reference, in the chart you can see that the 4670 performs 2x as fast as a 7900gtx! Gotta feel sorry for those suckers who spent 10x that for one of those then and gets half the performance! Again, the beauty of optimal price/performance! And it's slightly faster than an 8800gts 640mb! (which costs more!)
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch...f-Duty-4-v1-6,745.html
As far as the CPU, I can't say for sure cuz the D ain't so hot . But if I HAD to guess, I'd say that it should be alright.
see here and use the 9600gt as a stand-in for the 4670 (god, i love tom's hardware ):
http://www.tomshardware.com/re...pu-upgrade,1928-7.html
you can see that an e2160 at 1.8ghz (which is a core 2 duo with half the cache) can run it at 65.5 at 16x10, 4xaa, 8xaf. I would imagine that a D is about half as fast as an E series (CLOCK FOR CLOCK), so it should be able to run it fine at 3.2GHz
if we look at unreal tournament 2004:
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch...urnament-2004,398.html
Here you can see that a D 840 (3.2ghz) scores 46.4fps in this CPU based bench, compared to an e2160 (1.8ghz) which scores 53fps. SO, the d 840 is 86% the speed of the d2160. If we then go back to the previous benchmark of whether or not a cpu or gpu upgrade is worth it, we can see that in cod4, the e2160 scores 65.5fps, therefore, we can roughly estimate performance of your CPU in the cod4 bench to be 56fps! They're both dual core processors, so the game's enhanced multithreaded nature over UT2K4 shouldn't be too much of an issue. This should be fairly accurate. So, in conclusion, we can see that your CPU should be well matched up with the 4670 in cod4 (somewhat simplified/estimated: 56fps for CPU vs 57fps for GPU)! I just wouldn't try to run supreme commander on that CPU, in that case the CPU will be the bottleneck... UPDATE: I just looked it up, in supreme commander, the D 840 scores 14.5fps... ouch! My previous recommendation still stands though for COD4