BF3 offers nothing new for people who have played the other battlefield games, but I don't see anyone on a crusade to convince people that the game shouldn't be benchmarked.
Im playing CIV 5 for hundreds of hours and its nothing new. Same with Shogun 2..
Lame point, but could you not be so obviously biased? Would you even say the same thing of an TWIMTBP game, such as BL2??
Like Crysis?
I'm not sure how 'popular' it was; but it is legendary for the graphics taxing it does.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
This would be perfect in theory, but in the real world it hardly works because:
- the most demanding games are often not very popular anymore or have no multi-player component at all which means once you beat them, you probably don't revisit them. For example, Crysis 1/Warhead, Metro 2033, Witcher 2 EE);
- the most popular games are often the least demanding (since developers want them to run on as many systems as possible). For example Diablo 3, WOW, SC2, Left 4 Dead 2, Warcraft 3, TF2, Minecraft, Sims
- At the moment, only BF3 falls into both Popular+GPU demanding+still good enough to test next generation GPUs. So are we going to have a review of just 1 game?
To be able to test future generation of GPUs you have to look at different things: performance with high resolutions/texture mods, or include modern games that use of some new graphical feature (i.e., tessellation or global illumination). Ironically, Sleeping Dogs, Sniper Elite V2 and Dirt Showdown are 3 modern games that use global illumination and why are actually a foreshadowing of a possible new graphical lighting model via direct compute shaders (or they may not be depending on how the industry evolves).
If anything, it makes a lot more sense to test Sleeping Dogs than BL2 because BL2 runs like butter on a $230-300 GTX660/660Ti but Sleeping Dogs chokes on a $500 videocard. The other aspect of testing Sleeping Dogs which is appealing is that it allows reviewers to test very heavy AA performance, which stresses the GPU's ROP/memory bandwidth setup. Sleeping Dogs is thus used to test both the use of a new lighting model technique and AA, while BL2 is good for testing CPU limitations/IPC scaling and PhysX High CPU load.
Average performance wise a 660 Ti is about 10+% faster max overclock vs overclock and if based on that, pricing should be about $20-$30 more than a 7870. I refreshed my memory and the >20% advantage depends on certain games - but for that kind of advantage the $50 is worth it. Buying a 660 brings features like GPU PhysX of course.
There are a number of factors that that went into my decision to go with 660 Ti, beyond wishing to spend money or pro green bias:
1. Future proofing - yes yes, nothing is future proof. That said, a 7870 capable of 1200+/~1600 core/memory is just enough to max all games these days @ 1080p. However, even though there may be no groundbreaking technologies around the corner, future games will undoubtedly be even more demanding, and that +10% or greater advantage that the 660 Ti has will mean higher framerates and higher settings and may even extend the useful lifespan of the card, let us say a year. That's totally worth $50 in my books. Of course, this depends on the games I'll be playing, which brings us to the next point,
2. Battlefield 3, and Total War. I really like Battlefield 3. That +10% advantage that the 660 Ti has could mean the difference between 45 fps and 50 fps in a Battlefield like game - between choppy and smooth in that engine.
I'll definitely play Rome 2: Total War; maybe lots of it. The 7870 struggles in the Total War engine and here is where the 660 Ti can have a 20+% advantage.
3. Overclocking. I have a Galaxy 660 Ti 2gb GC with 6+8 pin power connectors, and with other features it is built for overclocking. I can't say for other people but I was pretty sure it could overclock like a beast and lo and behold it does. The 660 Ti's in general seem to be good overclockers like the 7950s, whereas the 7870 is hit and miss.
The MSI Hawk 7870 with its GPU reactor and unlocked voltages is likely to achieve 1200+/~1600, and perhaps the XFX Black Edition, and I would get a Hawk if I were to buy a 7870, with the caveat that the blue LEDs might keep me up at night. But considering that it's only just enough to max the games I want to play, it just doesn't have enough juice going forward. I want to have a card that's more powerful, the 660 Ti is the next step up and the cheapest, and I'll pay the $20 premium ($50-$30).
There are a number of factors that that went into my decision to go with 660 Ti, beyond wishing to spend money or pro green bias:
1. Future proofing - yes yes, nothing is future proof. That said, a 7870 capable of 1200+/~1600 core/memory is just enough to max all games these days @ 1080p. However, even though there may be no groundbreaking technologies around the corner, future games will undoubtedly be even more demanding, and that +10% or greater advantage that the 660 Ti has will mean higher framerates and higher settings and may even extend the useful lifespan of the card, let us say a year. That's totally worth $50 in my books. Of course, this depends on the games I'll be playing, which brings us to the next point,
2. Battlefield 3, and Total War. I really like Battlefield 3. That +10% advantage that the 660 Ti has could mean the difference between 45 fps and 50 fps in a Battlefield like game - between choppy and smooth in that engine.
I'll definitely play Rome 2: Total War; maybe lots of it. The 7870 struggles in the Total War engine and here is where the 660 Ti can have a 20+% advantage.
3. Overclocking. I have a Galaxy 660 Ti 2gb GC with 6+8 pin power connectors, and with other features it is built for overclocking. I can't say for other people but I was pretty sure it could overclock like a beast and lo and behold it does. The 660 Ti's in general seem to be good overclockers like the 7950s, whereas the 7870 is hit and miss.
The MSI Hawk 7870 with its GPU reactor and unlocked voltages is likely to achieve 1200+/~1600, and perhaps the XFX Black Edition, and I would get a Hawk if I were to buy a 7870, with the caveat that the blue LEDs might keep me up at night. But considering that it's only just enough to max the games I want to play, it just doesn't have enough juice going forward. I want to have a card that's more powerful, the 660 Ti is the next step up and the cheapest, and I'll pay the $20 premium ($50-$30).
Last edited:
SirPauly
Diamond Member
- Apr 28, 2009
- 5,187
- 1
- 0
That is not always the case though. World of WarCraft was indeed demanding when one desired quality on Alpha Tests -- the title was littered with them and frame-rate would drop into single digits in heavier scenes -- which was my alpha test worse case test title. Even today, with a GTX 670 with Stereo3d, and just x2 transparency added, the hit is there.
It was the reason for asking constructively for more flexibility for improvements with multi-sampling transparency quality and flexibility with transparency super-sampled over the years.
Jaydip
Diamond Member
- Mar 29, 2010
- 3,691
- 21
- 81
Jaydip
Diamond Member
- Mar 29, 2010
- 3,691
- 21
- 81
RS what I mean is scalability.It doesn't bother me if a game runs fine on a 200$ videocard(which it should) but you should need the top tier cards to have all the eye candy.Lets take Max Payne 3 for example. it runs fine on a gtx 570 but I doubt it can max it.If the game is not popular chances are high(if its a new engine i.e.) that the engine won't be used in the future.
If anyone can consider a 7870,get a 7850 instead and overclock it,if you got deeper pockets,the gtx660ti would make more sense but majority of people might chime in the 7950 is a better bargain.
Vote for oced 7850,some are getting near 7950 performance with a high enough overclock and a mild one can touch the 7870 while being a cheaper part.
Vote for oced 7850,some are getting near 7950 performance with a high enough overclock and a mild one can touch the 7870 while being a cheaper part.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter