Far Cry 2 Benchmarks / Unbelievable gains

[JPB]

WOW. Big difference for me in Far Cry 2. Check these out.


((((((((((Ultra High))))))))))))

Drivers 176---------180--------180 / 4xAA

Avg-----34.97------54.67------49.33
Max-----56.37------82.99------73.38
Min-----25.12------40.27------38.49

((((((((((Very High))))))))))))

Drivers 176---------180--------180 / 4xAA

Avg-----42.99------57.46------51.75
Max-----62.88------85.20------75.42
Min-----32.87------41.83------38.53

(((((((((((((High)))))))))))))))

Drivers 176---------180--------180 / 4xAA

Avg-----45.55------60.72------54.11
Max-----64.15------89.11------77.55
Min-----35.64------42.75------39.84

(((((((((((((Med)))))))))))))))

Drivers 176---------180--------180 / 4xAA

Avg-----62.05------69.43------61.74
Max-----84.93------98.40------83.46
Min-----46.24------51.35------46.15

(((((((((((((Low)))))))))))))))

Drivers 176---------180--------180 / 4xAA

Avg-----75.81------77.58------70.78
Max----107.71-----108.02-----94.45
Min-----54.58------57.39------52.95

 

[nRollo]

Impressive!

 

[JPB]

Yea, it is hard to believe it would produce this kind of performance jump.

No complaints here

 

[zerocool84]

How's image quality?

 

[JPB]

The image quality is great. To be honest, I think it is alot better than it was with my HD3870.

 

[JPB]

Ran tests again.

All tests identical except 4xAA added.

 

[Tempered81]

what res is that? 1440?

 

[james1701]

Your not kidding.

http://i283.photobucket.com/al...Benchmarks/FarCry1.jpg

http://i283.photobucket.com/al...Benchmarks/farcry2.jpg

http://i283.photobucket.com/al...Benchmarks/farcry3.jpg

1920x1200 Ultra on an 8800GT average 33fps.

 

[Bman123]

What is big bang?
It does look like it made a big bang for sure.
I plan on getting a 9800gtx very soon so this looks good to me

 

[zagood]

Wow.

OS/dx9/dx10?

 

[james1701]

vista hp 32 dx 10

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Unfortunately, for me, the new drivers aren't so hot. FC2 benchies down around 10%, 3dmark06 broken. Oh, well.

Running Vista64, 8800gt.

 

[MTDEW]

So has it been confirmed these 180.48 drivers are the same as the 180.47 Big Bang drivers?

 

[badnewcastle]

So are these different then 180.43?

 

[MTDEW]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle
So are these different then 180.43?

Yes, theyre 180.48

 

[james1701]

Most of the big bang stuff was getting released at the start of the 180 beta drivers. For people still using late 160's and mid to early 170 drivers, then they will see a nice difference. I think everyone else that kept current on their beta drivers is not going to see an earth shattering difference. I got 0 increase in Crysis with these drivers.

 

[dust]

Originally posted by: james1701
Most of the big bang stuff was getting released at the start of the 180 beta drivers. For people still using late 160's and mid to early 170 drivers, then they will see a nice difference. I think everyone else that kept current on their beta drivers is not going to see an earth shattering difference. I got 0 increase in Crysis with these drivers.

There is a discussion about the FC2 image being cropped at high resolutions, isn't this maybe the reason why you get better fps with this game once you have a new driver. Like you said, there is no difference in Crysis, but at least Crytek is fair play. I can't test higher than 1280/1024 since I have a crappy 19" old lcd but perhaps any of you people can see this.

 

[Cheex]

Great numbers man.

Well, I guess that's too late for me. My 8800GTS 320MB died so...I've upgraded to a 4870 1GB card (arriving next week). At least I should be getting much better frames now anyway.

 

[thilanliyan]

Why is there such a small performance hit enabling 4AA? That's almost unbelievable. I figure enabling 2AA gives a performance hit resembling that.

Also, are the performance increases limited to the 2XX series?

 

[warbean]

just wanted to post my results from the below thread, showing a minimal gain in Crysis Warhead from 178 to 180 series drivers.

____
These drivers are a disappointment for me.

E8600, 4 gigs RAM, vista 64

178 drivers on Crysis Warhead with Geforce 260 (original, not core 216)
26.52 fps on 1920 x 1200, gamer settings, 2x AA

180 driver, same setting,
26.57 fps. (after 3 loops)

a gain of .0018%, or about 2 tenths of 1 percent. Far short of the "up to 10% gains in Crysis Warhead" claimed in the patch notes.

 

[roid450]

the OP results is about what i get on my system. on Warhead i got some nice gains too, not too much though but noticeable

 

[JPB]

Yea, All of those tests I ran was identical except the last column of numbers include 4xAA.

I am still on Win XP Pro, so these were ran in DX9.0c. Cant wait to move to Vista though.

But yea, If anyone prefers, I can rerun the tests with screenshots :thumbsup:

Not saying anyone is saying the results arnt true, im just offering a solution since I know myself it is unbelievable.

And yes, the resolution is 1440x900. Will be trying on 1920x1080 next

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: warbean
just wanted to post my results from the below thread, showing a minimal gain in Crysis Warhead from 178 to 180 series drivers.

____
These drivers are a disappointment for me.

E8600, 4 gigs RAM, vista 64

178 drivers on Crysis Warhead with Geforce 260 (original, not core 216)
26.52 fps on 1920 x 1200, gamer settings, 2x AA

180 driver, same setting,
26.57 fps. (after 3 loops)

a gain of .0018%, or about 2 tenths of 1 percent. Far short of the "up to 10% gains in Crysis Warhead" claimed in the patch notes.

What patch? Regarding "patch notes".

 

[james1701]

I think since Crysis has been tweaked to death over the last year. I think there is not a whole lot of gains left to be had for that game.

 

[Cheex]

Originally posted by: james1701
I think since Crysis has been tweaked to death over the last year. I think there is not a whole lot of gains left to be had for that game.

Agreed.

It won't get much better for Crysis until the true next-gen cards show up...that are genuinely just more powerful.