Halo PC Benchmarks?

[hdeck]

http://www.clanwat.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=82&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

a little help for getting those FPS higher 🙂

 

[Guspaz]

The CPU is a bit old here (AthlonXP 1900+), but these results are disgusting:

Date / Time: 27/09/2003 2:14:19 PM (6342209ms)
1600MHz, 768MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=6.14.10.6378 Shader=1.4
D:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 1024,768,75 -timedemo (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=214.66s
Average frame rate=21.90fps
Below 5fps= 11% (time) 0% (frames) (23.718s spent in 14 frames)
Below 10fps= 11% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 13% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 20fps= 28% (time) 13% (frames)
Below 25fps= 63% (time) 49% (frames)
Below 30fps= 87% (time) 78% (frames)
Below 40fps= 97% (time) 94% (frames)
Below 50fps= 99% (time) 97% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 97% (frames)
Memory used Max=159MB, Min=129MB, Ave=148MB

Nearly top of the line videocard (Only what, 10, 15% behind a 9800 Pro?). And it barely tops 20FPS. These results are worse than UT2K3, and hint at a very poorly optimized engine. Let's hope a future patch at least doubles this. However, the bootleneck appears to be the CPU, which isn't surprising... Then again, considering the XBox version ran faster on a 733Mhz Celeron, maybe this IS surprising.

Since the videocard obviously isn't the bottleneck, I'd love to enable anti-aliasing to get better video quality without any performance hit. However, Halo doesn't allow anti-aliasing; even when forced in the drivers the game plays with it OFF.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: BoberFett
I'm not sure I understand how they could have botched this so badly. I mean, it was already a PC game that ran fine on a P3 733 with 64 MB RAM and and what is essentially a GF3.

Edit: If I had read the entire thread, I'd have seen that several people already pointed this out. 😱

I really don't think it's that botched...

I am betting that is still BETA which has been posted.

On Sept 30th, we will see if anything changes. Reguardless, i ran BETA 1.5 and it was very acceptable for beta.

What did they have to develop? Why is there even a Beta? They had the engine in place. Put in some higher poly count models and higher res textures and ship it. It was already a PC game. The more powerful hardware on the desktop should make up for any lack of optimization that adding higher res graphics exposed.

 

[PowerMacG5]

I don't care what all these beta numbers say, I preordered the game a month ago, and intend to go through with the purchase. So what if my system can't run it at 1280*1024 and full AA and AF. That doesn't bother me. I could care less if I have to run without AA and AF and at 1024*768. As long as I have over 40 fps, the game is playable. When the time comes, I will upgrade, but my current system should play the game just fine without any eye candy.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Guspaz
The CPU is a bit old here (AthlonXP 1900+), but these results are disgusting:

Date / Time: 27/09/2003 2:14:19 PM (6342209ms)
1600MHz, 768MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=6.14.10.6378 Shader=1.4
D:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 1024,768,75 -timedemo (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=214.66s
Average frame rate=21.90fps
Below 5fps= 11% (time) 0% (frames) (23.718s spent in 14 frames)
Below 10fps= 11% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 13% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 20fps= 28% (time) 13% (frames)
Below 25fps= 63% (time) 49% (frames)
Below 30fps= 87% (time) 78% (frames)
Below 40fps= 97% (time) 94% (frames)
Below 50fps= 99% (time) 97% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 97% (frames)
Memory used Max=159MB, Min=129MB, Ave=148MB

Nearly top of the line videocard (Only what, 10, 15% behind a 9800 Pro?). And it barely tops 20FPS. These results are worse than UT2K3, and hint at a very poorly optimized engine. Let's hope a future patch at least doubles this. However, the bootleneck appears to be the CPU, which isn't surprising... Then again, considering the XBox version ran faster on a 733Mhz Celeron, maybe this IS surprising.

Since the videocard obviously isn't the bottleneck, I'd love to enable anti-aliasing to get better video quality without any performance hit. However, Halo doesn't allow anti-aliasing; even when forced in the drivers the game plays with it OFF.

Worse than UT2k3?

WAY worse... Most can pull 60-70 in botmatch and over 100+ in flybys..

I just hope that the final release is a bit better..

Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

 

[The Sauce]

Originally posted by: Budman

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: bjc112
That's beta.

The Sept. 30th release should be MUCH different.

The above benchmarks are from the FLT release that came out last night. I've heard rumours of it being beta as well, but nothing definite. You have a link?

alt.binaries.comp

Is that a good group? I have never checked that one out.

 

[The Sauce]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
yea 1.5 but dont worry, a gf3 and a decent system would run the game high to highest details pretty well, the xboxc uses a slightly modified gf3 ti200 and a 733mhz p3. So a 1 ghz or more with a gf3 and 64Mb of ram or more would do much better. They should have an option to run on "xbox" settings, that way it looks awesome and runs on even slwo machines. My comp is over 5 times that of xbox, i dont see why they cant make it at least as fast as the xbox version.

Because the resolution the xbox has to output to is like 320x240.

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

I wonder why this game is CPU bound...

 

[The Sauce]

Also can someone please clarify the Sept. 25 flt release issue? I plan to buy the game and don't want to waste 6 hours d/l'ing this if it's another beta just to tide me over for 4 days.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

True, the fact is.. That FLT release may STILL be beta..

We could all be worrying about absolutely nothing.

And the 320x240 is a good point...

I think in the end we will all be a bit suprised of how well it runs.

 

[Maleficus]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

True, the fact is.. That FLT release may STILL be beta..

We could all be worrying about absolutely nothing.

And the 320x240 is a good point...

I think in the end we will all be a bit suprised of how well it runs.

I think your optimism is blinding you. Fairlight isnt known for mess-ups and bad rls's.

 

[The Sauce]

So come on already, someone who has it - beta or gold?

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

True, the fact is.. That FLT release may STILL be beta..

We could all be worrying about absolutely nothing.

And the 320x240 is a good point...

I think in the end we will all be a bit suprised of how well it runs.

I think your optimism is blinding you. Fairlight isnt known for mess-ups and bad rls's.

I doesn't matter if it's a mess up or bad release.. If it's beta, IT"S BETA.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: Xafgoat

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: Xafgoat
what about half life 2?

half life 2 will run worse on your system and it will sell like hot cakes

Yeah but it is probably not coming out till next year. By then the high end components will have changed.

out in november

Got a link to backup that release date? No...ok then be gone

umm, go to bestbuy.com

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: Xafgoat
what about half life 2?

half life 2 will run worse on your system and it will sell like hot cakes

No, you realize those benchmarks are at max detail. you can scale it down.

if you are referring to the HL2 benchies, the ones anand ran had AA and FSAA turned OFF and the 9800 pro still only got 46 fps in one of the demos @ 1024*768

at maximum detail. turn the settings down the FPS go up. Valve has stated that at the lowest settings 640x480 a GEFORCE CLASSIC will be able to run it.

i dont understand how this is max detail with NO AA and FSAA

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

True, the fact is.. That FLT release may STILL be beta..

We could all be worrying about absolutely nothing.

And the 320x240 is a good point...

I think in the end we will all be a bit suprised of how well it runs.

There is a gold iso to 😉

 

[cool0221]

There is a review just came out on ign.com, looks like the reviewers are also having a hard time boosting the fps for this game. Don't think their version is a beta🙂

Bottomline: it is a good game, have it if you can live with 30FPS.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Adul

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: bjc112
Bobber, you make a point.. However I really don't know what else needs to be done when trying to port a console game over to the PC.

🙂

My point is that it was not a console game. The Xbox is not a console. It's a low powered PC. But even as bloated as a PC is compared to a dedicated game PC, the overhead of a PC does NOT eat up an extra couple of Ghz.

True, the fact is.. That FLT release may STILL be beta..

We could all be worrying about absolutely nothing.

And the 320x240 is a good point...


yeah, what is the difference between GOLD and FLT?

I think in the end we will all be a bit suprised of how well it runs.

There is a gold iso to 😉

what is the difference between gold and flt?

 

[obeseotron]

I've used both the 1.5 beta and the FLT version, and I'm pretty sure that the FLT one is a final. That said I'm pretty disappointed in the performance. Comparisons to the xbox aside, the game doesn't look nearly as good as say unreal 2, but runs at about half the speed. Here's what I got:

Date / Time: 9/27/2003 6:32:10 PM (85280817ms)
2400MHz, 512MB, 128M nVidia GeForce4 Ti4400 (DeviceID=0x0251) Driver=6.14.10.5175 Shader=1.3
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 1024,768,85 -timedemo (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=186.12s
Average frame rate=25.25fps
Below 5fps= 9% (time) 0% (frames) (17.188s spent in 12 frames)
Below 10fps= 9% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 26% (time) 9% (frames)
Below 20fps= 30% (time) 12% (frames)
Below 25fps= 46% (time) 25% (frames)
Below 30fps= 63% (time) 43% (frames)
Below 40fps= 89% (time) 80% (frames)
Below 50fps= 97% (time) 93% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 96% (frames)
Memory used Max=161MB, Min=129MB, Ave=149MB

 

[The Sauce]

Originally posted by: obeseotron
I've used both the 1.5 beta and the FLT version, and I'm pretty sure that the FLT one is a final. That said I'm pretty disappointed in the performance. Comparisons to the xbox aside, the game doesn't look nearly as good as say unreal 2, but runs at about half the speed. Here's what I got:

Date / Time: 9/27/2003 6:32:10 PM (85280817ms)
2400MHz, 512MB, 128M nVidia GeForce4 Ti4400 (DeviceID=0x0251) Driver=6.14.10.5175 Shader=1.3
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -vidmode 1024,768,85 -timedemo (Version=1.0.0.564)
Frames=4700
Total Time=186.12s
Average frame rate=25.25fps
Below 5fps= 9% (time) 0% (frames) (17.188s spent in 12 frames)
Below 10fps= 9% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 26% (time) 9% (frames)
Below 20fps= 30% (time) 12% (frames)
Below 25fps= 46% (time) 25% (frames)
Below 30fps= 63% (time) 43% (frames)
Below 40fps= 89% (time) 80% (frames)
Below 50fps= 97% (time) 93% (frames)
Below 60fps= 99% (time) 96% (frames)
Memory used Max=161MB, Min=129MB, Ave=149MB

Does the flt one play past the silent cartographer level?

 

[0roo0roo]

does it run smooth in the game itself?

physics engine hurting cpu performance??

 

[The Sauce]

I dont have the fps but even the beta played smoothly on my XP3000 + 9800Pro

 

[Medicated858]

Methinks all those Rage3d benchmarks were run with max details also, so comparing HL2 and Halo is valid. Both were not retail versions either.

 

[MDE]

The original only had to run at 320x240 @ ~30fps (TV res\ refresh rate) albeit on crappy hardware (compared to today's PCs). But you're trying to run this thing on four times the resolution, at three times the framerate. It isn't gonna happen.