UT2K3 Demo / Ti4200 Benchmarks

[Slacker]

Hey Rand, switching to the 30.xx detonator drivers did the trick, runs and looks awesome, there were some nasty glitches with the 40.xx drivers, and the first three times I tried to run it my system rebooted, 40.xx dets suck :|

I also installed the demo on my sons computer with a pIII 700@785 and a geforce2 gts, it runs great at 1024x768 32bit color.

 

[acx]

Pentium 4 1.6A @ 2.24
512MB PC2100 DDR SDRAM @ 140MHz
GeForce 3 Ti200 64MB @ (200MHz/500Mhz)
Detonator 30.82 drivers
Windows XP Pro SP1

640x480
Flyby: 141.241104
Botmatch: 50.728817

800x600
Flyby: 132.510788
Botmatch: 49.859596

1024x768
Flyby: 99.246277
Botmatch: 49.670868

1280x960
Flyby: 69.601959
Botmatch: 44.658218

1600x1200
Flyby: 61.048141
Botmatch: 39.037849

 

[Rebel7254]

Originally posted by: Slacker
Hey Rand, switching to the 30.xx detonator drivers did the trick, runs and looks awesome, there were some nasty glitches with the 40.xx drivers, and the first three times I tried to run it my system rebooted, 40.xx dets suck :|

I also installed the demo on my sons computer with a pIII 700@785 and a geforce2 gts, it runs great at 1024x768 32bit color.

The demo runs perfectly for me with the 40.41's. Bombing run is freakin' fun!

 

[mechBgon]

Duron 1GHz@1.33GHz on K7S5A
256Mb PC2100 DDR SDRAM @ 133MHz
GeForce 2 GTS-V (the $50 econo-GF2 with lower clock speed)
Detonator 28.somethin' drivers
Win98SE

1024 x 768 Benchmark.exe results:

Flyby: 38.0 fps
Botmatch: 23.9 fps


I did also try this with the Duron and memory at 100MHz/100MHz, and the results were nearly the same: 38.0/22.8 So it looks like the video card is definitely the bottleneck. However, it's plenty playable.

[Editorial mode] I'm afraid I'm not feeling compelled to buy UT2003. For the most part, the graphics are approximately on par with Descent3 (from back in '98), unless they have more tricks up their sleeve that the demo doesn't show. I think my next game purchase is going to be Mechwarrior4 Mercenaries... [/Editorial mode]

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: mechBgon
[Editorial mode] I'm afraid I'm not feeling compelled to buy UT2003. For the most part, the graphics are approximately on par with Descent3 (from back in '98), unless they have more tricks up their sleeve that the demo doesn't show. I think my next game purchase is going to be Mechwarrior4 Mercenaries... [/Editorial mode]

I don't really enjoy this type of game and never planned on buying it. I look forward to dusting off my old Microsoft Sidewinder joystick (came with MW2 Mecenaries) to play MW4 merc. I am also looking forward to Raven Shield which will use this Unreal engine.

 

[mechBgon]

The REAL Sidewinder joystick! YES! The venerable 3D Pro! :Q I have four of them, perfect for Descent and MW. How annoying that it can't be detected as a 3D Pro by Windows on fast systems (my fast systems, anyway).

 

[jdogg707]

P4 2.26@2.7GHZ
512MB DDR400 @ 400 CAS2
Leadtek Geforce4 Ti4600 320/735

All results @ 1280x1024x32bit color

dm-antalus
16.307341 / 44.254219 / 84.838799 fps
Score = 44.282711

br-anubis
25.917435 / 71.680321 / 118.961136 fps
Score = 71.713974

dm-asbestos
12.916252 / 54.922638 / 110.269707 fps
Score = 54.958191

ctf-citadel
6.815062 / 40.229065 / 92.763664 fps
Score = 40.269806

dm-antalus
31.049614 / 82.720741 / 296.482880 fps
Score = 82.736290

dm-asbestos
35.631924 / 145.901962 / 495.380157 fps
Score = 145.978149

ctf-citadel
40.480957 / 105.768982 / 320.664093 fps
Score = 105.931343

16.307341 / 44.254219 / 84.838799 fps -- Score = 44.282711 rand[15060]
25.917435 / 71.680321 / 118.961136 fps -- Score = 71.713974 rand[24693]
12.916252 / 54.922638 / 110.269707 fps -- Score = 54.958191 rand[17578]
6.815062 / 40.229065 / 92.763664 fps -- Score = 40.269806 rand[19191]
31.049614 / 82.720741 / 296.482880 fps -- Score = 82.736290 rand[19846]
35.631924 / 145.901962 / 495.380157 fps -- Score = 145.978149 rand[32205]
40.480957 / 105.768982 / 320.664093 fps -- Score = 105.931343 rand[5090]

 

[Mk1980]

those link upward isn`t working for me, anyone could give me addresses or links to this demo,,, plz

 

[John]

Originally posted by: Mk1980
those link upward isn`t working for me, anyone could give me addresses or links to this demo,,, plz

http://subscriber.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=40&threadid=871201

 

[Mem]

John your link was helpful ,Mk1980 download the demo from here .

 

[Lonyo]

Get Kazaa and download the demo through that, that way even if your connection messes up you won't lose all your time spent downloading it. Great game, but doesn't seem to like my comp (only around 35 fps @ 800 x 600 playing Antalus)

 

[Jayczar]

1024 X 768

Flyby: 156.5
Botmatch: 54.7

1.6a @ 2140
Abit BD7-R
512 Samsung 2100 DDR
MSI Ti4600 CE

 

[BillnSandi]

Here are my results:

1024x768x32 noAA

Flyby: 171.44
Botwatch: 65.45

1600x1200x32 noAA

Flyby: 85.95
Botwatch: 51.18

Standard UT2003 Benchmark using benchmark.exe

Rig is stock/clocked except for some boosted memory. I will post some more results when I bump the FSB and squeeze the Ti4600

 

[rancherlee]

System
1600+ @ 1754mhz (167x10.5)
256meg pc2700
Radeon 8500 128meg retail @ 306/306

1024x768x32 NoAA highest settings
Flythrough--150.68
Bot-----------54.36

 

[klah]

Here are benches comparing 14 different cards(no Radeon 9700 though) with this demo test: www.3dcenter.org GoogleTranslation. At 10x7 with no AA or aniso it is CPU limited for anything over a GF3Ti200.

 

[Egrimm]

P4 1.6A @ 2448 (153fsb)
512Mb Samsung pc2700 @ ddr404 2.5/3/3/7
Asus P4b-533-E
Palit Daytona Ti4200 128Mb oc'ed to 300/526

1600x1200
Flyby 70
Botmatch 48

1024x768
Flyby: 147
Botmatch: 64

800x600
Flyby 184
Botmatch 65

 

[Mk1980]

Thanks for the links,, I have poor score on Athlon 1333 C 256mb Sdram pc133,, Gainward Geforce4 ti4200 128mb oc to 310\580

1024x768
Flyby 107,5
Bot 36,446



Is this score something like time to upgrade??? to 2ghz AthlonXp with Kt400 and ddr400 ???

 

[BillnSandi]

Has anyone noticed a performance drop on the UT2003 timedemo since installing Windows SP1 for XP? I lost nearly 20 fps on the top end and cannot explain why.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Warning! Aged system alert.

Celeron II @800
ABIT BM6 440BX
512MB Kingston PC100 CL2
Visiontek GeForce2 GTS-V @190/329

640x480x32
Flyby: 65.4
Bot: 22.2

800x600x32
Flyby: 63.2
Bot: 20.4

1024x768x32
Flyby: 49.5
Bot: 19.9

1280x1024x32
Flyby: 30.6
Bot: 19.6

Botmatch doesn't seem to care much about resolution. The game should be playable at 800x600x16 with toned-down quality settings.

 

[lambasa]

Well, I just upgraded my system, to those considering upgrading an old video card (note I have a fast CPU) to a new one.

Okay, here are my results for my P4 system:

2.5GHz P4
1.25GB PC800 ECC
ATI Radeon DDR 32MB --now--> Prolink GF4 Ti4200 128MB (280MHz core, 500MHz memory)

Results:
1280x960x32
Flythrough--23.4------> 98.0
Bot-----------16.2------> 55.1

1024x768x32
Flythrough--35.6------>138.7
Bot-----------23.9------> 59.2

800x600x32
Flythrough--42.0------>170.8
Bot-----------32.2------> 59.4

640x480x32
Flythrough--69.2
Bot-----------39.7

1600x1200x32
Flythrough--------------> 65.7
Bot-----------------------> 45.1

It seems even at 1280x960 the benchmark seems to be CPU limited (after all, we play with bots... not just flyby's). Super high frame rates are nice, but what really matters is your framerates when the action gets going. A fast video card is only half the solution... bring on 3GHz!!!!

 

[jiffylube1024]

P4 1.8A @ 2.25 GHz, 512MB Crucial DDR @ 166 MHz X2
Asus P4B266
GF3 Ti200 @ 220/500

UT 2k3 demo w/ patch 1:

Flyby: 79.69
Botmatch: 49.98

I don't know why, but I lost 20 fps on the flyby and 5 fps on the botmatch from updating to patch 1. I can only wonder what the highest res textures will perform like on my machine .

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: BillnSandi
Has anyone noticed a performance drop on the UT2003 timedemo since installing Windows SP1 for XP? I lost nearly 20 fps on the top end and cannot explain why.

Maybe it's from updating to patch 1 like me. Did you also update your demo?

 

[CuriousGeorge]

Anyone know of any benchmarks of 2K3 on a Radeon 9700? Is it just me or is it disturbing how the 9700 doubles the performance of the run of the mill Ti4600? I'm happy playin my UT1999 on my 1600+ XP/ Voodoo3 3000 AGP until nVIDIA slashes some prices on these Ti4600s. And even then I won't be able to play the game at competitively playable levels with any kind of image quality features activated. I already spied a Ti4200 refurb for $110 (sold out) and at $125 (still available) and a Ti4600 refurb (sold out) for $185 over on newegg. Is this a sign of things to come? I see a $150 Ti4600 in my near future. Come on nVIDIA, drop a bomb on ATi with a lil thing called NV30 and start a nice little price war. And drop the GF4 Ti prices as well. For a video card the price of a console, I want my QUINCUXX Anisotropic 4xAntiAliasing video card before Christmas, dammit.

 

[Maverick215]

1600x1200
Flyby=64.8
Bots=44.2
P4 1.6a oced to 2.1 at 133 fsb
ti4200 pny from bb just got it hehehehehe stock speeds 250/500
reboot and disabled dual view
66/44.7

 

[Moishe]

Looks like this game will require some power to run it.
I'm gonna DL the demo and post some results from my system (p3-561/Voodoo5/256mb pc133) LOL
that should give some laughs... )
Sucks to think that even a gf4-4200 will be fast enough for decent resolutions.

I want to play this at 1280x.