• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Metro Last Light benchmarks, share yours.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
(sic)Klown12 said:
Jaguar and PD/Bulldozer/SR are completely different designs. You cannot infer one's performance by looking at the other. Jaguar was built with only one thing in mind, performance/watt, and could end up being AMD's Memron.
Click to expand...

PD is their high performance core is it not? good performance/watt alone can't compensate for the lack of raw performance.
 
It's ridiculous that I need to turn down settings a lot just to keep the game playable on a card that cost 1k$. It's kind of sad that we still don't have single cards that can handle 2560 resolution even though they cost roughly 2x as much as they used to 🙁2k$ for graphics cards just to play the game smoothly is a lot. I haven't bothered to see which settings cost a lot in FPS and don't bring much in the way of IQ. Going by this site tessellation improves the look of rocks but is it worth 25% lower fps? http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/metro-last-light-test-gpu.html
SSAA is out of the question on a single card, that's for sure. What about PsyX, is it worth it?
It's definitely a game that needs multiple cards to enjoy it on very high details.
I still haven't decided which game should I play first, this or FarCry3 blood dragon. Crysis 3 is also in my backlog of games, which of those games is the most enjoyable? Sorry for the slight OT.
 
Lepton87 said:
It's ridiculous that I need to turn down settings a lot just to keep the game playable on a card that cost 1k$. It's kind of sad that we still don't have single cards that can handle 2560 resolution even though they cost roughly 2x as much as they used to 🙁2k$ for graphics cards just to play the game smoothly is a lot. I haven't bothered to see which settings cost a lot in FPS and don't bring much in the way of IQ. Going by this site tessellation improves the look of rocks but is it worth 25% lower fps? http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/metro-last-light-test-gpu.html
SSAA is out of the question on a single card, that's for sure. What about PsyX, is it worth it?
It's definitely a game that needs multiple cards to enjoy it on very high details.
I still haven't decided which game should I play first, this or FarCry3 blood dragon. Crysis 3 is also in my backlog of games, which of those games is the most enjoyable? Sorry for the slight OT.
Click to expand...

They do this on purpose. No matter how powerful the hardware gets they'll make sure you "need" more.
 
Here's the results for the FX8350 @ 4.6 Ghz with a single GTX680:
6x11c8x.jpg
 
I had like 26.7 fps average with fully maxed out settings and 1080p/smaa including maxed out driver settings for quality visuals.
27.3 If i use High performance driver settings.

Now that I think about it, Min frame rates are probably more important.
 
Last edited:
HeXen said:
I had like 26.7 fps average with fully maxed out settings and 1080p/smaa including maxed out driver settings for quality visuals.
27.3 If i use High performance driver settings.

Now that I think about it, Min frame rates are probably more important.
Click to expand...

this game has smaa? and you should probably stop forcing settings from cp as you are more likely to cause issues that way.
 
My 7770@1100/5000 did 23,75* fps average in benchmark. After patching it is 26,76* fps. Almost 15% boost, not bad. Drivers 13.5 (beta)
vzuia9.jpg
[/IMG]
1280x1024*😉
 
Can someone tell me what are the minimum FPS with 3930K at 4.4 Ghz and SLI TITANs at maximum settings? If they dip too often under 60 and GPU usage goes under 70% I won’t buy the game.
I’m fed up of having top end hardware and getting performance from 2004 with GPU usage lower than 60%.
Yesterday I installed and played Assassin’s Creed 3 and when I got to Boston my FPS were in the 30s with minimum settings. This after spending more than £3000 in equipment. I wanted to lift my PC and throw it out the window and buy 1 of those new PoS consoles.
I’m reaching new levels of frustration.
 
RUN4Y0URL1F3 said:
Can someone tell me what are the minimum FPS with 3930K at 4.4 Ghz and SLI TITANs at maximum settings? If they dip too often under 60 and GPU usage goes under 70% I won’t buy the game.
I’m fed up of having top end hardware and getting performance from 2004 with GPU usage lower than 60%.
Yesterday I installed and played Assassin’s Creed 3 and when I got to Boston my FPS were in the 30s with minimum settings. This after spending more than £3000 in equipment. I wanted to lift my PC and throw it out the window and buy 1 of those new PoS consoles.
I’m reaching new levels of frustration.
Click to expand...
Don't throw it out the window, throw it my way! Heck your rig is so awesome, I'll gladly pay the shipping from the UK if you are so inclined to throw it out the window and even throw in a few pounds for a stout and fish n chips!😎😀
 
guskline said:
Don't throw it out the window, throw it my way! Heck your rig is so awesome, I'll gladly pay the shipping from the UK if you are so inclined to throw it out the window and even throw in a few pounds for a stout and fish n chips!😎😀
Click to expand...

Is it really that awesome? I can't keep a minimum of 60 FPS in 1080p in 80% of games I played recently.
 
RUN4Y0URL1F3 said:
Can someone tell me what are the minimum FPS with 3930K at 4.4 Ghz and SLI TITANs at maximum settings? If they dip too often under 60 and GPU usage goes under 70% I won’t buy the game.
I’m fed up of having top end hardware and getting performance from 2004 with GPU usage lower than 60%.
Yesterday I installed and played Assassin’s Creed 3 and when I got to Boston my FPS were in the 30s with minimum settings. This after spending more than £3000 in equipment. I wanted to lift my PC and throw it out the window and buy 1 of those new PoS consoles.
I’m reaching new levels of frustration.
Click to expand...
Look at this review. It may offer some insight as to what settings to use.
Basically don't use SSAA.

I personally ran SSAA at 2x I think w/ Physx and FXAA to 8x or something.
http://www.techspot.com/review/670-metro-last-light-performance/page4.html
 
RUN4Y0URL1F3: Just noticed something in your sig. What's with the 20 GB ssd? With what you have, I would be using at least a 128 gig ssd or higher for the OS Was the 20 GB Intel a misprint?
 
guskline said:
RUN4Y0URL1F3: Just noticed something in your sig. What's with the 20 GB ssd? With what you have, I would be using at least a 128 gig ssd or higher for the OS Was the 20 GB Intel a misprint?
Click to expand...

I actually have a 20Gb SSD. I still need to look into upgrading it.
Would I gain many FPS in games?
 
Pretty bad FPS with a OCed 660 TI because of my old Q6600 CPU!
This is the first time where this old CPU severely limits me, only 34 FPS "very high quality" benchmark at 1650/1080 and other eye-candy all up, except SSAA.

But the game itself is *playable*.

By the way, if you do not activate SSAA, it uses some internal FXAA variant, jaggies are actually not very noticeable in the game.

Edit: Also tested former 320.18 NV drivers and compared to 326.01, FPS about the same.

Edit: Tessellation at "Normal".

Edit: Despite the lackluster benchmark FPS, I am actually playing with 2xSSAA and it's still playable!
Logic behind this: If the GPU is already limited/under-used because of CPU limitation I can as well turn-on SS to at least use the card to the fullest. And yes it's playing fine like that.
 
Last edited:
RUN4Y0URL1F3 said:
Can someone tell me what are the minimum FPS with 3930K at 4.4 Ghz and SLI TITANs at maximum settings? If they dip too often under 60 and GPU usage goes under 70% I won’t buy the game.
I’m fed up of having top end hardware and getting performance from 2004 with GPU usage lower than 60%.
Yesterday I installed and played Assassin’s Creed 3 and when I got to Boston my FPS were in the 30s with minimum settings. This after spending more than £3000 in equipment. I wanted to lift my PC and throw it out the window and buy 1 of those new PoS consoles.
I’m reaching new levels of frustration.
Click to expand...

SLI and Crossfire have always been and always will be a waste. Way too much time stuffing around with drivers and settings when games are built for consoles and a single GPU primarily. Plus, how many games are released each year that can take advantage of that much hardware grunt? One or two? I'd rather have spent 1500 pounds on a cracking single GPU system and put 1500 pounds into a going out pub fund.
 
escrow4 said:
SLI and Crossfire have always been and always will be a waste. Way too much time stuffing around with drivers and settings when games are built for consoles and a single GPU primarily. Plus, how many games are released each year that can take advantage of that much hardware grunt? One or two? I'd rather have spent 1500 pounds on a cracking single GPU system and put 1500 pounds into a going out pub fund.
Click to expand...

SLI is not a complete waste. With 2 TITANs I get on average 50% more FPS than with a single 1.
I agree on the fact that games are built for consoles and almost no game can take full advantage of SLI TITANs, as GPU utilisation is rarely at 99%.
Hopefully this will change with the new consoles.
By the way, I still have money to go to the pub! 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top