Fps
- Thread starter NoBag
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 2,181
TF2: 59-60 FPS(I have Vsync on) with everything maxed out.
I have a Q6600 @ 3.0, 4GB's of 4-4-4-12 1T 800Mhz DDR2 RAM, and an 8800GT running at 650 core(shaders linked). Lowest it ever drops is like 57, which is rare.
I have a Q6600 @ 3.0, 4GB's of 4-4-4-12 1T 800Mhz DDR2 RAM, and an 8800GT running at 650 core(shaders linked). Lowest it ever drops is like 57, which is rare.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 3,218
TF2 and DoD I get outstanding frames because of the multi-core rendering. And CSS is around 150-200 but with alot of physics and players it drops to 30-50.
With a GTX 275 and an AMD Phenom x3 @ 2.8
With a GTX 275 and an AMD Phenom x3 @ 2.8
(7600GT).. but stuffs on low >.> if it were on high prolly 20-30
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,923
wow thats strange u drop so low...........
Im running Q6600 @ 3.6 ghz, ATI 4850 @ 715 core 1150 memory
CSS - ~100-200
MW2 - ~70-80 (AA/AF isn't maxed but i have it on)
TF2 - ~60 (Vsync)
DoD - ~ about same as CSS i think, idk i definitely don't see any FPS drops and i never ran FRAPS on it so im guessing its around CSS frames
MW1 - ~90
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 4,044
CS:S:299fps
TF2:280fps (299 peak)
DoD: idk probably 299
borderlands: 90
G:MOD: 299 (dips to 88)
L4D:250fps
L4D2: 230fps
this is all at max settings NO VSYNC, 1680x1050p, these scores are averages based on NET_graph 1/3 or fraps
Btw, im on an ATi Radeon HD 4890 1gb
TF2:280fps (299 peak)
DoD: idk probably 299
borderlands: 90
G:MOD: 299 (dips to 88)
L4D:250fps
L4D2: 230fps
this is all at max settings NO VSYNC, 1680x1050p, these scores are averages based on NET_graph 1/3 or fraps
Btw, im on an ATi Radeon HD 4890 1gb
Last edited:
well all i have is CSS to compare, but i have phenom ii x2 550 @ 3.1 ghz on an am2+ board 2 gb ram 4-4-4-12 timings with a bfg 8600 gt oc TI edition running at 700 core 1540 shader 825 memory and i get between 150-250 fps on CSS on fullscreen, 1680x1050 everything high except no HDR or AA/AF. if i add max AA/AF i get bout 70 fps
TF2: 180
CS:S: 280
DoD: Don't know
COD4: 120
INS: 300
2 ATI Radeon 4870 1GBs in Crossfire with an Intel Core i7 920 @2.66 GHz. Also, no one is talking about their moniters... it makes a huge difference. I use a 32 inch 1920x1080 reso, so the FPS I get is good for the resolution.
CS:S: 280
DoD: Don't know
COD4: 120
INS: 300
2 ATI Radeon 4870 1GBs in Crossfire with an Intel Core i7 920 @2.66 GHz. Also, no one is talking about their moniters... it makes a huge difference. I use a 32 inch 1920x1080 reso, so the FPS I get is good for the resolution.
I ask myself the same thing...:cursing:
TF2 I get upwards of 30 if I am lucky, when the map is crowded more like 20. This is in game; sitting in spawn I get ~70 but I have FPSmax at 70. AND I have all the video settings at low or medium.
I have a nvidia 8500gt with 512M. (i know, not great)
I am so sick of low fps that I am actually considering getting a GTX275 or something along those lines. $250 is a ridiculous amount of money to have to spend to play a game...
Oh, I have 3GB of CPU mem, and a quad core Phenom @2.2Ghz
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 3,218
Yeah but it usually only happens on Office when everything is exploding.
MW1 I get a steady 250fps (capped) and MW2 is 91 or 81 (capped and I don't remember which one it is)
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 3,218
Sorry to double post, but the card is definitely gonna hurt you some. And that CPU will bottleneck a GTX 275 pretty bad. A 9800gt would be just fine for you.
My brother has the 9750 (2.4ghz) and it bottlenecks his 4870 pretty bad.
I was under the impression that the CPU has little to do with the performance of the GPU.? Is this not the case?
Also, is a phenom quad core @2.2Ghz a "low performer"? I thought it was pretty up there, comparatively speaking.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2009
- Messages
- 670
The bottlenecking of your cpu can kill your frames. I remember seeing that when a guy did 3dmark test with a single, double, and triple 260gtx. It was to the point that the dual was FASTER than the triple; so he overclocked his processor, and the triple killed the double.
What I don't understand is why have 100+ frames in a game? Why not have vsync on? You're only making your video card work harder than necessary. (For those of you who don't know what vsync is, it keeps your frames per second output the same as what your monitor will allow [60fps/60ghz monitor]).
What I don't understand is why have 100+ frames in a game? Why not have vsync on? You're only making your video card work harder than necessary. (For those of you who don't know what vsync is, it keeps your frames per second output the same as what your monitor will allow [60fps/60ghz monitor]).
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 2,181
First part: What do you think tells the GPU what to do? The CPU. What do you think happens if the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can feed it information? A bottleneck.
Second part: The number of cores and frequency are not the only thing that matters in a CPU, which is a common misconception. The architecture also plays a huge role. The amount of cache, the level of cache(L1, L2, L3, etc) is a very important factor in CPU performance. The number of threads that can be simultaneously processed is also important(1,2,4,8). Your CPU can process 4 threads simultaneously, whereas the high end consumer parts right now can do 8(but 4 are at a lower performance level than the other 4). 4 is not shabby though, and enough for gaming.
I do not know much about AMD's side of the spectrum and do not know how well that CPU performs, and what cards it would bottleneck.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 2,181
a 60Ghz monitor? Wow, hard to believe we went from 240hz to 60,000Hz since I last looked at monitors/TV's.:O
Pretty sure you mean 60Hz, or 60 times a second.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 3,218
The regular Phenoms aren't 'low' performers, but they are very far from high. What makes the Phenom II's much, much faster is the higher numbers of Cache (Like FreakingHell said) and they're clocked alot higher due to the 45nm shrink compared to 65nm Phenom I's. If you had a Phenom II x4 clocked at 2.2ghz it would be fine.
But with games as of now, the best results are from Dual Cores. Mainly the Phenom II x2 and the E8400 (being the most popular) both being clocked at 3ghz.
http://anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=21&p2=85
Best example of what a little bit more Cache can offer ^
All in all with a 9800gt, GTS250, etc. you won't notice much bottlenecking, but with that CPU it could slow a GTX275 down to almost the speed of a GTS250.
