Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Quote:
In total, we tested 23 AMD and Nvidia graphics card configurations spanning all budgets. We tested using the ultra-quality preset with FXAA, Field AO, HBAO+ (default), MSAAx4, Field AO and HBAO+ as well as FXAA and Field AO with HBAO+ disabled.

...

To measure frame rates, we used Fraps to record a minute of gameplay from the first mission. The Core i7-4770K was used at its default operating frequency for all the GPU tests.

Finally, we know that many of you will be interested in CPU scaling performance as well, so we clocked the Core i7-4770K and FX-8350 processors at several frequencies to see what kind of impact this has on performance when using a GTX Titan with the ultra-quality preset. Additionally, we ran similar tests using a range of processors including the Core i7-3960X, i5-3570K, i3-3220 and AMD Phenom II X6 1100T.

We'll look for an average of 60fps for stutter-free gameplay.
http://www.techspot.com/review/706-splinter-cell-blacklist-benchmarks/

From the results it looks like Nvidia/Intel hardware is favoured.

I just picked up this game today...gonna try running it with WHQL...if SLI doesnt work I guess I'll try the beta driver.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,764 Posts
That i7 920 at 2.66GHz matching the 4GHz 8350. A mid range processor released in 2008 vs a flag ship (non trolly flagship) 2013 processor.

Please AMD, I really do try to throw money at you but you make it so hard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,594 Posts
You do realize that this 920 is 1 fps off a 3930k too on that graph? That by raising its clocks to 3.2 base like the 3930k it would probably match it or surpass it even, which means the graph is generally way off?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,763 Posts
Yeah, this game does favour nvidia/intel hardware. I have been hearing about a lot of crashes when it comes to amd hardware. Well, let's hope there is a fix around the corner though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
wow i didnt realize this game uses a heavily modified UE 2.5...if it wasn't for the tech goodies thrown in this game would've looked like pure arss haha
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milestailsprowe View Post

Something is wrong with these benches I get 50ish frames not 32
yeah because you had the exact same test system at the same clocks and knew exactly which minute of the first level they benched?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,872 Posts
I play on my G73, i5 540m(Arrandale) with a GTX 460m clocked at 752mhz (650 stock) @ 1080 with mostly high settings, no AA and it runs like butter around 40-70 FPS.

Doubt any desktop rig would have trouble with it.

Side note, such a GREAT game. Just fantastic, this is what hitman should have been more like. Loving it so far needless to say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,848 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylon View Post

I play on my G73, i5 540m(Arrandale) with a GTX 460m clocked at 752mhz (650 stock) @ 1080 with mostly high settings, no AA and it runs like butter around 40-70 FPS.

Doubt any desktop rig would have trouble with it.

Side note, such a GREAT game. Just fantastic, this is what hitman should have been more like. Loving it so far needless to say.
REALLY glad to hear this, I've been eyeing this game for some time!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

You do realize that this 920 is 1 fps off a 3930k too on that graph? That by raising its clocks to 3.2 base like the 3930k it would probably match it or surpass it even, which means the graph is generally way off?
That doesn't mean the graph is way off at all, it just means that this game likes high core speeds, or in AMD's case, CRAZY high core speeds.

The fact that a 2.66GHz quad-core processor from years ago matches the performance of an octo-core 4GHz flagship processor is a little scary.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,627 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylon View Post

Side note, such a GREAT game. Just fantastic, this is what hitman should have been more like. Loving it so far needless to say.
Hitman Absolution is a terrific game
frown.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,594 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrBrogbo View Post

That doesn't mean the graph is way off at all, it just means that this game likes high core speeds, or in AMD's case, CRAZY high core speeds.

The fact that a 2.66GHz quad-core processor from years ago matches the performance of an octo-core 4GHz flagship processor is a little scary.
If we take the 920 reported performance at face value and call 8350 garbage, what can we say about the 3930k then-it is just 1 fps ahead, matched by a puny i3. If ithe game liked IPC, 3930k should be way ahead, since it is sandy vs nehalem. Same if it liked clockspeeds (2.66 vs 3.2 base,although real difference must be smaller due to turbo), same if it was about the core count/threads (6/12 vs 4/8). There is absolutely no excuse for those two processors to be so near each other, that's the problem with this graph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

If we take the 920 reported performance at face value and call 8350 garbage, what can we say about the 3930k then-it is just 1 fps ahead, matched by a puny i3. If ithe game liked IPC, 3930k should be way ahead, since it is sandy vs nehalem. Same if it liked clockspeeds (2.66 vs 3.2 base,although real difference must be smaller due to turbo), same if it was about the core count/threads (6/12 vs 4/8). There is absolutely no excuse for those two processors to be so near each other, that's the problem with this graph.
Well the game obviously does not scale well with increased cores. My guess is that it only uses 2, period. The increase in performance is pretty linear and pretty consistent with clock speed increases, and the IPC difference between those Intel processors isn't all that different (the oldest one there is the i7-920), so my guess is that the deck was just stacked against AMD from the beginning, given their inability to compete with Intel in IPC.

It's sad that brand new AAA games are still unable to scale well across multiple cores.
 

·
Official Luddite of OCN
Joined
·
5,734 Posts
Welp, either drivers or just a poor engine. No excuse for a 7970ge edging out a 760 by a mere 1fps at 1600p...
 

·
Overclocked
Joined
·
3,924 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

If we take the 920 reported performance at face value and call 8350 garbage, what can we say about the 3930k then-it is just 1 fps ahead, matched by a puny i3. If ithe game liked IPC, 3930k should be way ahead, since it is sandy vs nehalem. Same if it liked clockspeeds (2.66 vs 3.2 base,although real difference must be smaller due to turbo), same if it was about the core count/threads (6/12 vs 4/8). There is absolutely no excuse for those two processors to be so near each other, that's the problem with this graph.
Nothing wrong with the graph. That just means it is a GPU intensive game. and there is a slight CPU bottleneck somewhere in the benchmark. hence the close fps between AMD FX 6000+ & Intel i5+. Or in other words for the most part the GPU usage was at peak most of the time, only in small parts the CPUs made a little difference, that's why the average fps between all CPUs is close.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadlessKnight View Post

Nothing wrong with the graph. That just means it is a GPU intensive game. and there is a slight CPU bottleneck somewhere in the benchmark. hence the close fps between AMD FX 6000+ & Intel i5+. Or in other words for the most part the GPU usage was at peak most of the time, only in small parts the CPUs made a little difference, that's why the average fps between all CPUs is close.
It also seems like people forget that the single-core performance of modern i3s is only a teeny bit behind i5s and i7s anyway, and a lot of that is because of clock speed differences.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top