Age of Conan Gameplay Performance and IQ @ Hardocp

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I don't understand where they are getting their numbers from anyway...

The minimum frames for both the 9600GT and the 3870 in the tables don't line up with the included graph.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...NlTFlDVEpfNF8zX2wuZ2lm

The min fps for the HD 3870 dips below the reported min of 14 fps a few times, and the 9600GT dips way below 15 fps close to the left side of the graph. HardOCP indicates that the only card that is playable out of the three is the 8800GT, but interestingly they fail to actually recognize why. You would think that they would notice that the 9600GT and HD3870 dip between 0-5 fps on occasion, and show that in the min/avg/max table properly.

The sharp dips to <5 fps aren't really significant, the game was probably loading something from the hard drive. If those dips lasted longer than a few milliseconds they would be noted as the minimum framerate.

Exactly and point on.

Ok... few questions for you smart guy...

1) Probably loading something from the HD, eh? Why is it that the faster 8800GT magically doesn't suffer from these "load times"?

2) Notice that the peak at 49fps for the Radeon doesn't cover any more time than the dips below 10fps close to the 141 and 281 second intervals. Why is the max indicated as 49fps and the minimum as 14, when the Radeon more frequently and for just as long dips below 14fps as it sustains 49fps?

3) Why would anyone bother to graph something in increments that were too small to be meaningful? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the graph?

Why thanks mullet

1. Test systems was using Vista 64. If you haven't used Vista by now the hard drive is always doing something. If they didn't do multiple runs the frame rates could spike. With 2gigs with Vista 64 CCC uses more ram than Nvidia drivers. And those sudden drops could be witnessed when ram runs out playing a MMO like Conan

2. Well it's freaking fraps. It's also has a overhead.

3. You should ask H

1. That's a lot of creativity to defend H's numbers. If they had issues with Vista that made their results show such extreme dips with the Radeon, don't you think they should maybe make a mention of it.

2. I'm not even sure what that is supposed to mean with regards to the question. As I read it though, it says that HardOCP accepts FRAPS' numbers without actually doing any analysis of the data, and you accept HardOCP's conclusion without bothering to do any critical analysis of the data provided. I'm not saying that HardOCP is bad, just that they are not infallible.

3. Wow, you got one right! This was actually the answer to all three...

The point is that you really shouldn't just accept results that clearly have unexplained anomalies that are for some reason ignored by the author.

 

[AzN]

1. It's just common sense when you use vista with 2 gigs of ram and playing a mmo.

2. You probably never used fraps

3. You should have them directly instead of asking me genius.

Damn "smart guy" why do you ask questions if you know the answer to? Could it be you trying to personal attack? Grow up!

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Azn
Well Chizow has argumentative problem with me. You could have guess it by now. We are like water and fire ever since we had a long thread about why I think G92 is bandwidth deprived and he thinks it doesn't.

Hardly, most of the time I just ignore your nonsensical rhetoric because its simply not worth the effort. You say you understand but you continually ignore arguments and cited evidence claiming they're not good enough or undermine the source (even your own beloved Tech Report) and instead reply with some nonsensical rhetoric. That's why I don't bother linking sources or benches for you anymore, its pointless to as you'll either 1) dismiss it because its not from a search engine or a 3DMark synthetic or 2) won't understand it.

In this case however, I just pointed out a difference that contributed to your flawed conclusion and you got all defensive about it. Except I'm right about the subjective settings in that test, its plainly obvious to anyone who actually plays games on their PC hardware. There's at least 4 3870 users in the HOCP thread alone lamenting about the performance of their cards with a few specifically mentioning shadows. I've posted over in the HOCP thread where there's at least 3 staff members actively posting, we'll see if they reply. They did reply to the question about minimum frame rates however.

 

[Razorfist]

Best graphics card, performance to cost ratio.

WINNER: 8800GT with a ratio of 1337:1

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Azn
It seems this game uses a lot more shader to make the pronounced difference.

not really... 8800gt does not have as much shaders as 3870, but it perform quite a bit better...

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Azn
1. It's just common sense when you use vista with 2 gigs of ram and playing a mmo.

2. You probably never used fraps

3. You should have them directly instead of asking me genius.

Damn "smart guy" why do you ask questions if you know the answer to? Could it be you trying to personal attack? Grow up!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

The point is that you are arguing (vehemently) about numbers that don't appear to be accurate.

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Ok... few questions for you smart guy...

1) Probably loading something from the HD, eh? Why is it that the faster 8800GT magically doesn't suffer from these "load times"?

2) Notice that the peak at 49fps for the Radeon doesn't cover any more time than the dips below 10fps close to the 141 and 281 second intervals. Why is the max indicated as 49fps and the minimum as 14, when the Radeon more frequently and for just as long dips below 14fps as it sustains 49fps?

3) Why would anyone bother to graph something in increments that were too small to be meaningful? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the graph?

1. The game isnt going to load stuff in the same exact spot every time. It's a MMO, remember, theres a million different variables in their test.

2. HardOCP is retarded, I dunno

3. See #2

 

[golem]

Unless they chose an empty area with no activity, wouldn't there be no way to test an MMO and be sure that the same thing happened for each card? Is there an offline mode or something?

 

[mmnno]

If they're going to do best playable settings, then they need to have a page that explains what each setting does and its impact on performance for every single card in the review. Otherwise the information is meaningless. As far as I can tell, their conclusions are wrong, and the 9600GT is clearly better than the 3870, but neither card can handle "everything" shadows at 19x12.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Azn
Well Chizow has argumentative problem with me. You could have guess it by now. We are like water and fire ever since we had a long thread about why I think G92 is bandwidth deprived and he thinks it doesn't.

Hardly, most of the time I just ignore your nonsensical rhetoric because its simply not worth the effort. You say you understand but you continually ignore arguments and cited evidence claiming they're not good enough or undermine the source (even your own beloved Tech Report) and instead reply with some nonsensical rhetoric. That's why I don't bother linking sources or benches for you anymore, its pointless to as you'll either 1) dismiss it because its not from a search engine or a 3DMark synthetic or 2) won't understand it.

In this case however, I just pointed out a difference that contributed to your flawed conclusion and you got all defensive about it. Except I'm right about the subjective settings in that test, its plainly obvious to anyone who actually plays games on their PC hardware. There's at least 4 3870 users in the HOCP thread alone lamenting about the performance of their cards with a few specifically mentioning shadows. I've posted over in the HOCP thread where there's at least 3 staff members actively posting, we'll see if they reply. They did reply to the question about minimum frame rates however.

I think you were the one being defensive how HARDOCP could make a conclusion about 3870 being better than 9600gt in Age of Conan. In the end 3870 gave better experience compared to 9600gt. That was there conclusion. Not to mention your SP being worthless feature comment. And your grasping for straws about a 9600gt that cost $100 after rebate 2 months ago when the price difference TODAY is $10.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Azn
It seems this game uses a lot more shader to make the pronounced difference.

not really... 8800gt does not have as much shaders as 3870, but it perform quite a bit better...

Did I say 8800gt had more shader than 3870?

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Azn
1. It's just common sense when you use vista with 2 gigs of ram and playing a mmo.

2. You probably never used fraps

3. You should have them directly instead of asking me genius.

Damn "smart guy" why do you ask questions if you know the answer to? Could it be you trying to personal attack? Grow up!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

The point is that you are arguing (vehemently) about numbers that don't appear to be accurate.

Hypocrite much?

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Ok... few questions for you smart guy...

1) Probably loading something from the HD, eh? Why is it that the faster 8800GT magically doesn't suffer from these "load times"?

2) Notice that the peak at 49fps for the Radeon doesn't cover any more time than the dips below 10fps close to the 141 and 281 second intervals. Why is the max indicated as 49fps and the minimum as 14, when the Radeon more frequently and for just as long dips below 14fps as it sustains 49fps?

3) Why would anyone bother to graph something in increments that were too small to be meaningful? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the graph?

1. The game isnt going to load stuff in the same exact spot every time. It's a MMO, remember, theres a million different variables in their test.

2. HardOCP is retarded, I dunno

3. See #2

That was exactly my point to begin with.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

This is where 8800gt stomps the 9600gt all over the place. 3870 seems to be stomping the 9600gt as well.

Eh? With Apples vs Apples settings it goes 8800 GT > 9600 GT > 3870.

isn't that how most games, at most review sites, go?

 

[HOOfan 1]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777
Yep... Been said so many times. HardOCP is a garbage site, it even looks like garbage. They should get a new web designer.

Their GPU reviews may be screwy, but their PSU reviews are about the best on the internet...while Anandtech's PSU reviews are pretty screwy.

I think they have something going with the "highest possible settings" benchmarks, but they also need to fleshout and refine their apples to apples to include more resolutions and settings.