Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
badger77

High End Cards in WW2 - Are they all that ???

10 posts in this topic

Well I did some tests a little while back and believed my card is not getting pushed at all. In fact by increasing my CPU speed the FPS went up in a direct correlation to the increase. So 10% increase in CPU speed = 10% extra FPS near as dammit.

So I was wondering how others have fared on the benchmarks we just done for CRS.

Here is the question - Is a top end card an utter waste for WW2 online. i.e there comes a point where your card is not pushed at all and it's all a CPU bottleneck. what is that point. (I reckon it's somewhere between a 9800 and GTX 260).

For example I have W7 64 bit with an older GTX 260 (192 cores) and an I7 2.63 processor.

When doing the rain test offline near the barracks I get about 89 - 92 FPS regardless of cloud or rain or anything

I think some people believe if they get a $350 + dollar video card with a core duo or athlon based processor they will get super FPS.

I am saying your better to spend $180 on a GTX 260 or similar and spend the rest on a processor upgrade if you can.

Any other results. Similar processors with better cards or worse cards will help narrow it down. Other processors with better cards may also be interesting.

(Of course any figures are in offline with nothing much going on - The real test is getting into open beta and seeing the differences in a busy town - but it's a start.)

Edited by badger77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the same. I'm running a Phenom 9950 and get a noticeable increase in FPS when I overclock to 3GHz from 2.6. Changing the settings on the graphics card (GTX260) seems to have no effect at all, even between AA an AF off and 16X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the question - Is a top end card an utter waste for WW2 online.

No.

1.31 is the most graphics intense version of the game yet; shaders, polygons, everything has gone significantly up in this version and a better video card WILL be necessary to get playable framerates.

When doing the rain test offline near the barracks I get about 89 - 92 FPS regardless of cloud or rain or anything

Clouds and rain are NOT graphics intense features and essentially cost your video card nothing. The clouds are a layer of 2D textures and the rain is a simple animated sprite which plays in front of you.

I think some people believe if they get a $350 + dollar video card with a core duo or athlon based processor they will get super FPS.

Intel's Core Duo series is now 3 and half years old (went on sale in the summer of 2006) and as such is no longer "high end" hardware (not by any stretch). Intel's current mainstream CPUs are the Core i5 and i7 series.

I am saying your better to spend $180 on a GTX 260 or similar and spend the rest on a processor upgrade if you can.

I don't disagree; a GTX260 will be just fine for 1.31 and you'll definitely want to spend as much as you can on the processor.

Changing the settings on the graphics card (GTX260) seems to have no effect at all' date=' even between AA an AF off and 16X.[/quote']

LOL, I don't buy that for one second. Switching between 4x AA and AA off in 1.31 more than doubles my FPS. The same is more or less true for 1.30.

Switching from no anti-aliasing to 16 samples of anti-aliasing along the edge of every polygon *WILL* cost you FPS, even if you have $4000 pc and you're running Half-Life 1.

Maybe your AA isn't working or something?? :P

Edited by xanthus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intel's Core Duo series is now 3 and half years old (went on sale in the summer of 2006) and as such is no longer "high end" hardware (not by any stretch). Intel's current mainstream CPUs are the Core i5 and i7 series.

depends on the core version. a 45nm wolfdale with 6mb of cache is pretty high end, especially if you OC it to ~4ghz. a 65nm allendale, not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No.

1.31 is the most graphics intense version of the game yet; shaders, polygons, everything has gone significantly up in this version and a better video card WILL be necessary to get playable framerates.

Clouds and rain are NOT graphics intense features and essentially cost your video card nothing. The clouds are a layer of 2D textures and the rain is a simple animated sprite which plays in front of you.

Intel's Core Duo series is now 3 and half years old (went on sale in the summer of 2006) and as such is no longer "high end" hardware (not by any stretch). Intel's current mainstream CPUs are the Core i5 and i7 series.

I don't disagree; a GTX260 will be just fine for 1.31 and you'll definitely want to spend as much as you can on the processor.

LOL, I don't buy that for one second. Switching between 4x AA and AA off in 1.31 more than doubles my FPS. The same is more or less true for 1.30.

Switching from no anti-aliasing to 16 samples of anti-aliasing along the edge of every polygon *WILL* cost you FPS, even if you have $4000 pc and you're running Half-Life 1.

Maybe your AA isn't working or something?? :P

Well I am saying a high end card - So 5850 or 280 and above for example.

A 260GTX I see as not super high end just very good.

I run an I7 and swapped from a Core 2 Duo 3.16ghz Wolfdale - The performance increase is good but not perhaps as much as you would think.

Seriously go test a card. Turn your card DOWN to 70% and if it a good one it will make no difference to the FPS - Of course this may be different once playing online but offline on a 260GTX I turned the speed way down before my FPS got hit.

So the question is what FPS do we get on an I7 with a lesser card ?

As you have pointed out the CPU is king BUT that needs a good/ very good video card to reach it's bottleneck. The card may well not be stretched - Anything above a 260GTX will not give ANY extra FPS

Thats what I am trying to prove.

(The point I was making is there are people out there with AMD and Intel processors that THINK buying a top end card like a 5850 will increase their FPS massively - It may not. If they can buy a 260 for example and imporve their CPU it may be better money spent than putting $350 into a new card).

Edited by badger77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO high end card ARE a waste for this game. You just need a decent card, not high end. If you are mostly playing this game and want to get get most performance/$ you only need to get a better "regular" gamer graphic card (like a 260) but you should get a FAST CPU and RAM. Getting a slightly faster CPU will give you better FPS increase then a slightly faster GPU card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well my card pretty much idles its way through ww2ol. at least 1.30

I've yet to see my card peak above 125F playing ww2ol.

1.31 though seems to get it above 130~135F

That being said, ww2ol is all about processor power, and how fast your memory is.

if you want a bangin' ww2ol computer, get the best quad you can afford, and at least DDR3-1600/2200

I noticed a direct correlation between my processors speed, and my fps in ww2ol.

But all that being said, i'd still get a bad *** card for your computer, because if your anything like me, ww2ol is just another game in a long list of games i play

Edited by indo420

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well my card pretty much idles its way through ww2ol. at least 1.30

I

That being said, ww2ol is all about processor power, and how fast your memory is.

i

I noticed a direct correlation between my processors speed, and my fps in ww2ol.

y

Exactly what i've been seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an E8400 OC from 3.0ghz to 3.6ghz, took out an 8800GTS and put in a 285 Nvidia and got about 10% increase. Even at 3.6 I am CPU bound for the vidcard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an E8400 OC from 3.0ghz to 3.6ghz' date=' took out an 8800GTS and put in a 285 Nvidia and got about 10% increase. Even at 3.6 I am CPU bound for the vidcard.[/quote']

Thats what I was thinking - The ceiling of gaining performace by card alone is probably just above a 9800 and below a 260gtx

Even the I7 doesn't push my 260gtx yet and can still get scalable FPS increase by CPU speed increase alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.