AzN
Banned
- Nov 26, 2001
- 4,112
- 2
- 0
so what? do you want AA and 30 fps or the opportunity to get much more than that with a competent cpu? the cpu has already brought the game down significantly. with a better cpu he can actually then utilize a 5850 and crank up as many settings as he wants. the POINT is that with a video card twice as fast as mine and an even slower cpu then that would be even more performance wasted.
EDIT: well here you go I ran some numbers in Batman with 4x AA.
1920x1080 all very high settings, 4x AA and high physx
E8500 at 2.0 GTX260 at 576/1188/1990
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
1786, 63457, 18, 34, 29.035
E8500 at 2.0 GTX260 at 666/1392/2200
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
2086, 67780, 18, 36, 30.476
E8500 at 3.16 GTX260 at 666/1392/2200
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
2286, 65699, 27, 43, 34.795
this is not even a very cpu intensive game still makes more sense to have a decent cpu when you look at the minimums. again my cpu at 2.0 is faster than his 5600 X2 and a 5850 would be twice as fast as my 192sp gtx260. it is foolish to run a card like a $300 5850 with a cpu like a 5600 X2.
Or it could be that your hard drive was hiccuping when you used fraps to record those results. We have shit like this in review sites all the time.
Those numbers don't make sense either. Look at the peak and minimum. It doesn't add up.