Need For Speed Carbon Benchmarks Out!

[akshayt]

The benchmarks for Need For Speed Carbon Demo are out!

Test Rig:
AMD 64 3200 Winchester @ 2.4GHz
2GB DDR 400 Dual Channel RAM @ 399MHz
Radeon X1900XTX 512MB GeCube
Seagate SATA 160GB NCQ HDD
XP Pro SP2(old format and is kind of corrupt or infected with spyware or whatever you call it)


Circuit Race

CCC at Default Settings with HQ AF enabled, AA and AF as App Controlled
All Settings Maxed out in NFS Carbon Demo


1280x1024 no AA

Frames: 5089 - Time: 125573ms - Avg: 40.526 - Min: 30 - Max: 59

An average of 40FPS does mean that it should be pretty playable although I didn't actually feel so. I know that stutters are common to my machine right now. But even besides the stutters, the performance can at best be called playable and not that great.


1280x1024 4x AA

Frames: 4838 - Time: 115765ms - Avg: 41.791 - Min: 29 - Max: 74

The FPS are more or less the same here, but the the real world performance says otherwise. There is a huge dip in gaming performance experience(again I am not including the stutters which I get in many games, so, not others problem). I wouldn't recommend Radeon X1900xt/xtx owners to play at this setting because though some people might want to play with this setting now, you can't imagine the performance boost you gain by lowering the resolution and AA.


1024x768 no AA

Frames: 165 - Time: 6297ms - Avg: 26.202 - Min: 24 - Max: 29

I was really surprised as the FPS show a huge hit. But shockingly (despite my stutters) the game ran really well and was much much better than both previous settings. In fact my performance(the skill with which I was racing) became much better. I didn't feel one bit for the FPS decrease.


From what I have seen today 1024x768 maybe with some AA at the most should be the best gaming setting for 1900xt/xtx or 7900gtx owners. However I think we should wait for the full game to arrive and newer drivers as well. Hopefully we should atleast see the face of 1280x1024 with or without AA. 1280x1024 definitely looks much much better!

Hoping to see your benchmarks soon as well!


Minimum System Requirements

Intel P4 1.7GHz
512MB RAM
64MB VRAM ( Geforce 4 Ti/Radeon 8500)

 

[Hyperlite]

thanks for the benches...wish i could get the demo to work on my system!

 

[akshayt]

why doesn't it work. It didn't work for me too the first time, but the second time I tried with lower settings it worked, then I increased the settings from within the race.

 

[akshayt]

come on, please contribute your experiences as well.

 

[schneiderguy]

it runs at around ~25fps on my computer with everything on high, no AA or AF, at 1024*768

A64 3500+
7600gt
1.5 gigs of ram

 

[Acanthus]

The graphics do not equate the perofrmance numbers we are seeing here...

Does the game have HDR? Did i miss some wildly high detail models and photorealistic textures?

Its a damn racing game, there is no excuse for 30fps on a X1900XTX @ 1280

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
The graphics do not equate the perofrmance numbers we are seeing here...

Does the game have HDR? Did i miss some wildly high detail models and photorealistic textures?

Its a damn racing game, there is no excuse for 30fps on a X1900XTX @ 1280

IMO NFS: Most Wanted looked better than this game AND i was getting MUCH better performance in MW than in Carbon... on my "ancient" P$ 2.53ghz/1gig of ram/6800nu system i was getting excellent performance, around 30 FPS at 1280*1024 in Most Wanted -- that system can barely get 30 fps at 800*600 in Carbon :| That is especially dissapointing considering the enviroment in the Most Wanted demo is HUGE compared to the tiny ones in Carbon

 

[akshayt]

it does give 4fps with xtx, but not good performance

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: akshayt
it does give 4fps with xtx, but not good performance

 

[akshayt]

sorry, 40FPS.

With 10x7 16x HQ AF I got >50FPS, with 12x10 16x HQ AF I got >40FPS, no AA in these cases

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: akshayt
The benchmarks for Need For Speed Carbon Demo are out!

Test Rig:
AMD 64 3200 Winchester @ 2.4GHz
2GB DDR 400 Dual Channel RAM @ 399MHz
Radeon X1900XTX 512MB GeCube
Seagate SATA 160GB NCQ HDD
XP Pro SP2(old format and is kind of corrupt or infected with spyware or whatever you call it)


Circuit Race

CCC at Default Settings with HQ AF enabled, AA and AF as App Controlled
All Settings Maxed out in NFS Carbon Demo


1280x1024 no AA

Frames: 5089 - Time: 125573ms - Avg: 40.526 - Min: 30 - Max: 59

An average of 40FPS does mean that it should be pretty playable although I didn't actually feel so. I know that stutters are common to my machine right now. But even besides the stutters, the performance can at best be called playable and not that great.


1280x1024 4x AA

Frames: 4838 - Time: 115765ms - Avg: 41.791 - Min: 29 - Max: 74

The FPS are more or less the same here, but the the real world performance says otherwise. There is a huge dip in gaming performance experience(again I am not including the stutters which I get in many games, so, not others problem). I wouldn't recommend Radeon X1900xt/xtx owners to play at this setting because though some people might want to play with this setting now, you can't imagine the performance boost you gain by lowering the resolution and AA.


1024x768 no AA

Frames: 165 - Time: 6297ms - Avg: 26.202 - Min: 24 - Max: 29

I was really surprised as the FPS show a huge hit. But shockingly (despite my stutters) the game ran really well and was much much better than both previous settings. In fact my performance(the skill with which I was racing) became much better. I didn't feel one bit for the FPS decrease.


From what I have seen today 1024x768 maybe with some AA at the most should be the best gaming setting for 1900xt/xtx or 7900gtx owners. However I think we should wait for the full game to arrive and newer drivers as well. Hopefully we should atleast see the face of 1280x1024 with or without AA. 1280x1024 definitely looks much much better!

Hoping to see your benchmarks soon as well!


Minimum System Requirements

Intel P4 1.7GHz
512MB RAM
64MB VRAM ( Geforce 4 Ti/Radeon 8500)

How is it that your FPS increase the more demand you put on the video card and decrease when you lower the demand? I think your numbers are backwards.

The same system should render 10X7 faster than 12 X 10, and then when you add in AA, you should not seen an increase in FPS.

A few things that need clarification... 1) Did you use the SAME demo? It looks like you did not... 2) Did you use the same settings besides the resolution change and enabling of AA? Something doesn't add up here.

 

[Avalon]

Maybe you didn't notice, but your posted benchmark scores show your framerate increasing whenever you raise the resolution or apply AA. Either you wrote down the results backwards or something isn't right.

Also, with your partition being infected, as you put it, makes me not trust any numbers you put out.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

I believe we need a more reliable source than someone who says his own x1900xt is crap

 

[JPB]

Im downloading it now, Ill post fps/settings/res results once its done. Rig in sig

 

[KBTuning]

ill do it too when i get home... i got whats in my sig... should show what most of the rest of the world is buying nowadays... i.e. slower machines.

 

[Raduque]

Wow, who cares how fast it runs, the game looks and plays like crap. While I'm basing this on the 360 demo, it sure doesn't give me high hopes for the PC version.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Raduque
Wow, who cares how fast it runs, the game looks and plays like crap. While I'm basing this on the 360 demo, it sure doesn't give me high hopes for the PC version.

I was about to post the same thing. 360 Demo is a POS, couldn't delete it fast enough.

 

[morgash]

i will DL it and post my scores after class. i guaranteee i can run it at 1440x900 with at LEAST 4xaaa and 16xhqaf. no POS need for speed game is gonna bring MY x1900xt down.

morgash

 

[morgash]

damnit double post

 

[JPB]

Well, maybe a R600 or 8800GTX will give the frames we need to run it with high setting's. Here are my results....

4XAA 16XAF Forced through ATITool

Resolution 1280X1024
Shader High
V-Sync Off
World Max
Road Reflect High
Car Detail High
Motion On
Particle On

Never once acheived more than 30 fps
Lowest I saw was 19
Averaged 22

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

Originally posted by: x80064
Well, maybe a R600 or 8800GTX will give the frames we need to run it with high setting's. Here are my results....

4XAA 16XAF Forced through ATITool

Resolution 1280X1024
Shader High
V-Sync Off
World Max
Road Reflect High
Car Detail High
Motion On
Particle On

Never once acheived more than 30 fps
Lowest I saw was 19
Averaged 22

Ouch. And all for the privilege of lining EA's pockets.

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

I didnt bother to check FPS, but with my celeron D @ 3ghz and unlocked 128bit 9800se, I got playable performance at 1280x1024 with no AA.

 

[Gautama2]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Raduque
Wow, who cares how fast it runs, the game looks and plays like crap. While I'm basing this on the 360 demo, it sure doesn't give me high hopes for the PC version.

I was about to post the same thing. 360 Demo is a POS, couldn't delete it fast enough.

Agreed, horribly unrealistic handling killed it.

 

[CKXP]

Originally posted by: x80064
Well, maybe a R600 or 8800GTX will give the frames we need to run it with high setting's. Here are my results....

4XAA 16XAF Forced through ATITool

Resolution 1280X1024
Shader High
V-Sync Off
World Max
Road Reflect High
Car Detail High
Motion On
Particle On

Never once acheived more than 30 fps
Lowest I saw was 19
Averaged 22

i decided to give the demo a try, using the same exact settings as x80064 and pretty much got similar results, rarely above 30fps, usually in the mid/high 20's, but never below 20fps...

A64 3700 Newark @2.7ghz
1 Gig Corsair
7900GT @620/1700

 

[morgash]

ok i just ran it, and i dont plan on ever running it again lol. measured frames with FRAPS
1280x1024 4xAAA 16xHQAF forced via ATI control panel, all settings on highest in options

with vsync on frames never dropped below 60.

x2 3800+ @ 2.8ghz
2gb ddr500 2-3-3-5
x1900xt @ 740/825

i would imagine thats the power of the heavily OC'ed x1900xt and the dual core showing. still the game didnt look very impressive, give me gears of war anyday.

morgash