StereoVision requires vsync too, which would account for some of the framerate hit.
By the way Keys, I thought your CPU was at 3.2 before? What happened to the OC?
StereoVision requires vsync too, which would account for some of the framerate hit.
By the way Keys, I thought your CPU was at 3.2 before? What happened to the OC?
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,209
- 50
- 91
:::sigh::: Ok. I'll o/c the CPU and run it again. I'm thinking of getting that MicroCenter Q9550 for 169.00. Nice deal.
Ah. Performs a little better, but no change when I disable multi-GPU rendering. It appears this video benchmark is not SLI supported. So, my score is in line with your GTX275 ViRGE. And the single GTX275 was doing twice the work using StereoVision. So, 50% performance with StereoVision is just about in line.
I'll forward this to NV. Find out if this is just with the videobenchmark, and will the final product support SLI. I'm sure it will.
I just even tried making an SLI profile for the executable, but no dice.
Clocked my CPU back down to stock as well. On the bright side, it looks like a single GTX series card can play this game even when using StereoVision, with all the goodies turned on and 2-4x AA. There seem to be a lot of AA modes to choose from as well.
in an ideal solution, the SLI'd cards render the scene similar to AFR, except each card is solely rendering one side of the stereoscopic vision.
Sorry for the thread bump+double post, but I reran the benchmarks and got some interesting discoveries.
1. The benchmark varies slightly everytime you run it, with Chris+Sheva traversing a preprogrammed path through each scenario, but is still AI driven so the fighting is realtime rendered. It was especially evident after one run had Chris being hit, burned and bitten (by dogs) several times whereas another run had virtually no damage recieved.
2. Microstutter on Crossfire/X2 hardware and some flickering of textures are the result of turning on AA. with 8X AA on the Chris model was especially jittery whenever he was running.
3. Vsinc kills performance, dropping 8X AA performance at 1920 down to 35fsp (from 45fsp without AA)
4. 8X AA vs no AA does not offer noticeably improved visuals (at least not at 1920X1200) but is a huge hig on performance. This is especially prevalent in the third part of the variable benchmark where 8X AA dropped frame rates down to 15fps, whereas no AA on my 4870X2 ran a solid 66fps.
so at 1920X1200 with everything else turned as high as possible (with motion blur):
no AA: 128-78-66-77 respectively with a high 60-70s fps overall
8X AA: 119-40-15-40 respectively with 45fsp~ overall
8X w/ Vsinc: 100-33-13-32 with 35fps~ overall (these numbers are approximate from memory as I forgot to write them down after running the bench)
It's sad that enabling AA causes so much flickering and microstutter, but luckily it doesn't actually have that much of an impact on visuals
Edit: the new bench runs also have me thinking the cpu limit for the RE5 engine is capped somewhere in the 130fps range (for my cpu), as in the 4 benchmarks the latter 3 really showed big improvements after disabling AA whereas the first part only went up to 128 from 119. This was done on a 2.66GHz Q6600 as listed in my specs, and means RE5 is definitely not heavily CPU limited.
This was expected since Devil May Cry 4, which also runs on the MT Framework engine behaved very similarly in terms of benchmark numbers.
1. The benchmark varies slightly everytime you run it, with Chris+Sheva traversing a preprogrammed path through each scenario, but is still AI driven so the fighting is realtime rendered. It was especially evident after one run had Chris being hit, burned and bitten (by dogs) several times whereas another run had virtually no damage recieved.
2. Microstutter on Crossfire/X2 hardware and some flickering of textures are the result of turning on AA. with 8X AA on the Chris model was especially jittery whenever he was running.
3. Vsinc kills performance, dropping 8X AA performance at 1920 down to 35fsp (from 45fsp without AA)
4. 8X AA vs no AA does not offer noticeably improved visuals (at least not at 1920X1200) but is a huge hig on performance. This is especially prevalent in the third part of the variable benchmark where 8X AA dropped frame rates down to 15fps, whereas no AA on my 4870X2 ran a solid 66fps.
so at 1920X1200 with everything else turned as high as possible (with motion blur):
no AA: 128-78-66-77 respectively with a high 60-70s fps overall
8X AA: 119-40-15-40 respectively with 45fsp~ overall
8X w/ Vsinc: 100-33-13-32 with 35fps~ overall (these numbers are approximate from memory as I forgot to write them down after running the bench)
It's sad that enabling AA causes so much flickering and microstutter, but luckily it doesn't actually have that much of an impact on visuals
Edit: the new bench runs also have me thinking the cpu limit for the RE5 engine is capped somewhere in the 130fps range (for my cpu), as in the 4 benchmarks the latter 3 really showed big improvements after disabling AA whereas the first part only went up to 128 from 119. This was done on a 2.66GHz Q6600 as listed in my specs, and means RE5 is definitely not heavily CPU limited.
This was expected since Devil May Cry 4, which also runs on the MT Framework engine behaved very similarly in terms of benchmark numbers.
@dflynchimp
No AA makes a big difference on visuals even at 1920, just look at the barrels, gun, window frame, ....... Even the XBOX 360 uses 4xAA with this title.
Also DX10 with the HD4800 series currently has issues, which result to a huge drop in performance with stages 2, 3, and 4. From some of my SS comparisons DX10 offers little to nothing that will be notice in game.
DX9
DX10
IMO the biggest problem with this title are the clunky controls.
No AA makes a big difference on visuals even at 1920, just look at the barrels, gun, window frame, ....... Even the XBOX 360 uses 4xAA with this title.
Also DX10 with the HD4800 series currently has issues, which result to a huge drop in performance with stages 2, 3, and 4. From some of my SS comparisons DX10 offers little to nothing that will be notice in game.
DX9
DX10
IMO the biggest problem with this title are the clunky controls.
Controls are fine if you have a gamepad, and word of mouth is RE5 will have better keyboard/mouse support/schematics than RE4.
Regarding performance in DX9 and DX10, I agree with you that ATI really dropped the ball on DX10. The flickering issue is pretty exclusive to DX10 RE5, and if I run it in DX9 there's no flickering. The shadows aren't that much more improved either.
What DX10 has that DX9 doesn't is a better motion blur. With 9 it almost looks like you're getting a series of after-images rather than a smooth blur. DX10 blur is definitely better by far.
As for performance goes my X2 didn't take any hits from DX10 that weren't the same on DX9, meaning AA performance was equally bad for both renders, as was Vsinc.
Regarding performance in DX9 and DX10, I agree with you that ATI really dropped the ball on DX10. The flickering issue is pretty exclusive to DX10 RE5, and if I run it in DX9 there's no flickering. The shadows aren't that much more improved either.
What DX10 has that DX9 doesn't is a better motion blur. With 9 it almost looks like you're getting a series of after-images rather than a smooth blur. DX10 blur is definitely better by far.
As for performance goes my X2 didn't take any hits from DX10 that weren't the same on DX9, meaning AA performance was equally bad for both renders, as was Vsinc.
I've played this title with my 360 and the controls are very clunky / slow. The rumors had also said that RE5 would have action controls, but that didn't happen, so I don't expect much different for the PC.
The DX10 flickering must be from the card changing clocks, because I don't have that problem. My problem is performance takes a dump in DX10, as I showed in the 1st page.
I did notice the quality problem with motion blur in DX9, but enabling triple buffer vsync works just fine with 8xAA works just fine.
RE5 DX9 HDR 32bit 8xAA no motion blur with vsync
59.4 / 59.9 / 59.8 / 59.9 -> AVG 59.8
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 8xAA no motion blur with vsync
56.3 / 59.9 / 58.3 / 59.7 -> AVG 58.8
RE5 DX9 HDR 32bit 8xAA with motion blur and vsync
57.7 / 59.9 / 59.2 / 59.6 -> AVG 59.2
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 8xAA with motion blur and vsync
51.8 / 57.9 / 52.8 / 57.2 -> AVG 55.2
I hope ATi can get DX10 fixed this time, but lets see what happens.
The DX10 flickering must be from the card changing clocks, because I don't have that problem. My problem is performance takes a dump in DX10, as I showed in the 1st page.
I did notice the quality problem with motion blur in DX9, but enabling triple buffer vsync works just fine with 8xAA works just fine.
RE5 DX9 HDR 32bit 8xAA no motion blur with vsync
59.4 / 59.9 / 59.8 / 59.9 -> AVG 59.8
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 8xAA no motion blur with vsync
56.3 / 59.9 / 58.3 / 59.7 -> AVG 58.8
RE5 DX9 HDR 32bit 8xAA with motion blur and vsync
57.7 / 59.9 / 59.2 / 59.6 -> AVG 59.2
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 8xAA with motion blur and vsync
51.8 / 57.9 / 52.8 / 57.2 -> AVG 55.2
I hope ATi can get DX10 fixed this time, but lets see what happens.
evolucion8
Platinum Member
- Jun 17, 2005
- 2,867
- 3
- 81
Seems that there's a bug with the level 3 of the benchmark at DX10 mode with many HD 4x00 cards when Anti Aliasing is on because it runs on low fps and is less demanding than other levels, once you turn off anti aliasing the fps skyrockets on the level 3.
@evolucion8
The problem effects all HD4800 series cards, and has nothing to do with AA or level 3. Here look at the scores I get with DX9 and DX10 without AA.
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 0xAA motion blur
77.1 / 85.7 / 72.2 / 84.1 -> AVG 80.0
RE5 DX10 HDR 64bit 0xAA motion blur
69.8 / 67.9 / 53.8 / 66.2 -> AVG 63.9
DX10 clearly runs like crap.
The problem effects all HD4800 series cards, and has nothing to do with AA or level 3. Here look at the scores I get with DX9 and DX10 without AA.
RE5 DX9 HDR 64bit 0xAA motion blur
77.1 / 85.7 / 72.2 / 84.1 -> AVG 80.0
RE5 DX10 HDR 64bit 0xAA motion blur
69.8 / 67.9 / 53.8 / 66.2 -> AVG 63.9
DX10 clearly runs like crap.
1680x1050, DX10, 8xAA, Settings Maxed
98.5 | 88.4 | 70.5 | 81.0
Average: 83.3
screenshots
I'm kind of "meh" about the gameplay that I saw in the demo. Whole lot of zombies aimlessly milling around while the AI player just sat there and pumped rounds into them, little sense of urgency. It did look impressive at times though, like those zombies at the end with the things sprouting out of their heads, and the way zombies bubbled away after you killed them.
Edit:
The parts where I'm getting framerate dips are the gas tank explosions in Scene 3.
98.5 | 88.4 | 70.5 | 81.0
Average: 83.3
screenshots
I'm kind of "meh" about the gameplay that I saw in the demo. Whole lot of zombies aimlessly milling around while the AI player just sat there and pumped rounds into them, little sense of urgency. It did look impressive at times though, like those zombies at the end with the things sprouting out of their heads, and the way zombies bubbled away after you killed them.
Edit:
The parts where I'm getting framerate dips are the gas tank explosions in Scene 3.
CTA4LC4PON3
Member
- Jul 21, 2009
- 140
- 0
- 0
No.
I don't know about the nZone version and if it differs, but one you download from FileShack doesn't require the stereoscopic 3D hardware.
CTA4LC4PON3
Member
- Jul 21, 2009
- 140
- 0
- 0
CTA4LC4PON3
Member
- Jul 21, 2009
- 140
- 0
- 0
@AmberClad
Your score looks a little low for a OC GTX285. Did you edit the config.ini to use both threads of that E8400?
Your score looks a little low for a OC GTX285. Did you edit the config.ini to use both threads of that E8400?
win7 rc 64bit, cat 9.6 I7@4.0Ghz
1080P Max setting, no v-sync
stock 4870x2,
dx9 : 126.9 , 120.9, 8.8, 9.0 avg 60.9
dx10: 118.6, 42.2, 14.3, 40.6 avg 48.1
stock 4870 1GB
dx9: 65.7, 63.1, 53.8, 62.2 avg 60.8
dx10: 67.0, 22.1, 7.7, 22.0 avg 26.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------
vista 32bit, cat 9.7, stock Q9450 @2.66ghz,
1680x1050 Max setting, no v-sync
stock 4770,
dx9: 49.6, 51.2, 44.8, 48.3 avg 48.4
dx10: 53.7, 24.5, 9.3, 24.0, avg 25.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------
vista 64bit, 190.38, I7@4.0Ghz
1080P Max setting no v-sync
gtx285 702mhz core:
dx9 78.9, 69.0, 61.5, 66.2 avg 68.0
dx10 73.4, 65.5, 54.6, 61.8 avg 63.0
SLI gtx285 702mhz core + 648mhz core:
dx9 137.8, 123.3, 101.3, 109.5 avg 116.2
dx10 129.3, 116.1, 98.1, 106.7 avg 111.0
1080P Max setting, no v-sync
stock 4870x2,
dx9 : 126.9 , 120.9, 8.8, 9.0 avg 60.9
dx10: 118.6, 42.2, 14.3, 40.6 avg 48.1
stock 4870 1GB
dx9: 65.7, 63.1, 53.8, 62.2 avg 60.8
dx10: 67.0, 22.1, 7.7, 22.0 avg 26.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------
vista 32bit, cat 9.7, stock Q9450 @2.66ghz,
1680x1050 Max setting, no v-sync
stock 4770,
dx9: 49.6, 51.2, 44.8, 48.3 avg 48.4
dx10: 53.7, 24.5, 9.3, 24.0, avg 25.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------
vista 64bit, 190.38, I7@4.0Ghz
1080P Max setting no v-sync
gtx285 702mhz core:
dx9 78.9, 69.0, 61.5, 66.2 avg 68.0
dx10 73.4, 65.5, 54.6, 61.8 avg 63.0
SLI gtx285 702mhz core + 648mhz core:
dx9 137.8, 123.3, 101.3, 109.5 avg 116.2
dx10 129.3, 116.1, 98.1, 106.7 avg 111.0
AdamK47
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,243
- 2,865
- 126
183.4 FPS average
This is in DX10 with everything high, AA off, and motion blur on. Specs are:
CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @ 4000MHz
Motherboard: Asus P6T Deluxe @ 20 x 200MHz
Memory: 6144 MB of Patriot PC12800 @ 1600 DDR
Video Card: Two eVGA GTX 280 SLI @ 675/1350/2430
Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 - 1,500.0 GB
Monitor: Samsung LN37A550 37" 1080P LCD
CDROM Manufacturer & Model: Sony 20X AW-Q170A
Sound Card: Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi
Operating System: Windows Vista Home Premium x64 SP2
Other Components:
-Antec Nine Hundred case
-Cooler Master V8 heatsink/fan
-PC Power & Cooling 750W power supply
-Sennheiser HD280 Pro headphones
-Razer Lycosa keyboard
-CST 2545W trackball
This is in DX10 with everything high, AA off, and motion blur on. Specs are:
CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @ 4000MHz
Motherboard: Asus P6T Deluxe @ 20 x 200MHz
Memory: 6144 MB of Patriot PC12800 @ 1600 DDR
Video Card: Two eVGA GTX 280 SLI @ 675/1350/2430
Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 - 1,500.0 GB
Monitor: Samsung LN37A550 37" 1080P LCD
CDROM Manufacturer & Model: Sony 20X AW-Q170A
Sound Card: Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi
Operating System: Windows Vista Home Premium x64 SP2
Other Components:
-Antec Nine Hundred case
-Cooler Master V8 heatsink/fan
-PC Power & Cooling 750W power supply
-Sennheiser HD280 Pro headphones
-Razer Lycosa keyboard
-CST 2545W trackball
CTA4LC4PON3
Member
- Jul 21, 2009
- 140
- 0
- 0
ok i ran it. benchmark (Variable)
dualcore 4450e
3gb ddr2 ram
HIS 4850
antec earthwatts 430
all settings High , dx10, no vsync, no aa, average FPD (41.8) not 2 shabby concidering i have a low end Rig
dualcore 4450e
3gb ddr2 ram
HIS 4850
antec earthwatts 430
all settings High , dx10, no vsync, no aa, average FPD (41.8) not 2 shabby concidering i have a low end Rig
strange, can't duplicate your result with close to the same hardwares.
wonder if anyone else has similar setup...
w3520@4ghz
Asus P6T Deluxe @ 20 x 200MHz
12gb ddr1603
X-Fi Forte
velociraptor
vista ultimate 64bit
gtx285 sli match your clock
same game setting
all i got
210.2 ; 158.3, 154.6, 163.4 avg 168.1
evolucion8
Platinum Member
- Jun 17, 2005
- 2,867
- 3
- 81
In my system runs as the following;
DX9: 107.3 / 102.9 / 85.2 / 99.4 / Total: 97.9
DX10: 104.8 / 52.0 / 22.4 / 51.0 / Total: 53.2
Tests performed at 1280x1024, 8x FSAA, 16x AF with everything maxed out.
I set in the config HDR High but consumes a lot of VRAM with no noticeable difference and will cause some stuttering specially in DX10, also I set CPU Jobthreads to 4, I found that setting ReverbQuality to High will slow down horribly. I will perform the tests later with the default Jobthreads to 3 to see if it makes a difference, also my Internet browser was chugging up to 10% CPU cycles for no reason.
Updated: Setting Jobthreads to 4 uses all the 4 cores available with good performance boost in CPU limited areas.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter