Company of Heroes 2 BETA GPU test

[csbin]

http://gamegpu.ru/rts-/-strategii/company-of-heroes-2-beta-test-gpu.html

As we can see, AMD cards have shown excellent performance and fully given to defeat NVIDIA, if not GRFORCE GTX TITAN, which got us in just a matter of hours before the publication of the review and has shown a phenomenal performance ... A more detailed review will appear on our site shortly.

 

[DownTheSky]

Holy shit at the CPU chart! AMD is getting mauled!

 

[Fox5]

Holy shit at the CPU chart! AMD is getting mauled!

The original company of heroes also largely favored Intel cpus. However, CPU performance far outstripped what that game needed on any processor.

 

[DarkKnightDude]

Interesting, isn't the first game an Nvidia sponsored title? Did they flip in the second game?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Looks like amd CPU users can't play this game beyond high settings.

 

[notty22]

Interesting, isn't the first game an Nvidia sponsored title? Did they flip in the second game?

It's all in beta, this is after the engine and game was scrapped and sold in bankruptcy.

THQ Dissolved, Saints Row, Company of Heroes Devs Acquired

SEGA has agreed to purchase Relic, developer of Company of Heroes 2 and Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Who bought them?

 

[SithSolo1]

It's all in beta, this is after the engine and game was scrapped and sold in bankruptcy.

THQ Dissolved, Saints Row, Company of Heroes Devs Acquired

Yes it(Relic) was sold off after THQ dissovled but the engine and game were never scrapped. They were holding off on beta until the THQ thing played out and then delayed it at most two months as they made the transition to Sega.

Sadly I've got a dual-core Phenom II and a GTX 470 so I'm taking it from both sides.

 

[notty22]

Yes it(Relic) was sold off after THQ dissovled but the engine and game were never scrapped. They were holding off on beta until the THQ thing played out and then delayed it at most two months as they made the transition to Sega.

Sadly I've got a dual-core Phenom II and a GTX 470 so I'm taking it from both sides.

I understand this, if not clear. Profit and not optimization is probably at the top of the list. It's a beta regardless. I wouldn't fall on your sword/bayonet just yet

 

[poohbear]

Meh, drivers will fix this. Bf3 was terrible on amd vs nvidia on release. Amd fixed that after a few months. Just hope nvidia is more proactive about this & fixes it upon release!

 

[Silverforce11]

Soooo many good PC games these days.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Holy shit at the CPU chart! AMD is getting mauled!

CPU performance looks a bit odd to me. A lowly PhII x2 550 doesn't dip below 40FPS and averages 51FPS. As you add more cores, at least for AMD, it looks like some work is off loaded to the available cores, but not in a way that really increases performance all that much from the PhII 550. There is quite a bit of available CPU resource left on all the AMD chips beyond the PhII 550, but performance never even approaches an i3.

 

[Maximilian]

I think this game may basically be single threaded, or dual threaded but it will only offload simple stuff like audio etc to the second core. CoH dosent have masses of units and is not particularly spammy so to be fair its not an RTS that would benefit much from multi threading. Unlike almost every other RTS released!

If that is the case then the lower IPC of AMD chips will be the culprit for their worse performance here. Ill bet if those nehalem chips were clocked to the same speed as the sandy bridge ones their performance would be almost identical.

As for GPU's though... looks like i might need to upgrade from my 5850, or live with medium/high settings

 

[Maximilian]

Oh just noticed its minimum FPS and average FPS, i thought it was min/max.

AMD users should be fine, even the dual core averages 50 fps on stupid high quality.

 

[PG]

CPU performance looks a bit odd to me. A lowly PhII x2 550 doesn't dip below 40FPS and averages 51FPS. As you add more cores, at least for AMD, it looks like some work is off loaded to the available cores, but not in a way that really increases performance all that much from the PhII 550. There is quite a bit of available CPU resource left on all the AMD chips beyond the PhII 550, but performance never even approaches an i3.

I don't really trust their cpu results either, especially on the AMD side. If you go to their website and look around you will see that they have multiple computers they use for these cpu benchmarks. Yes, completely different computers, meaning different motherboards and bios, possibly different ram, etc for each computer as well. There are way too many variables to know if the results are really comparable.
There was one cpu graph a while back on their site that showed a Phenom II 940 beating an 1100T. It made no sense. The 940 is 3.0 Ghz where the 1100T is 3.3 with turbo up to 3.7, plus it has the extra 2 cores. The 1100T should never lose to a 940.
They list motherboards used in the graph, but what cpu got tested with what motherboard? You can't tell what was done with these guys.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Looked at GTX 690 score. Noted that SLI isn't working yet

 

[Cloudfire777]

I don`t trust that russian site for a second.

 

[chimaxi83]

I don`t trust that russian site for a second.

Oh ok, good thing you let us know :thumbsup:

 

[psolord]

I don`t trust that russian site for a second.

I've found that the performance delta of their 5850/570/7950 is consistent with what I see on my systems, so they are doing a decent job.

I am not talking specifically for this review, but previous ones which games I owned.

PS Thanks @ csbin for the interesting news he brings from time to time.

 

[boxleitnerb]

Beta results are always quite unreliable, especially since neither IHV has optimized performance drivers ready.