Games against CPUs. Part II

jmke · 12th November 2005, 15:39

We decided to write an update to our CPU gaming performance analysis. In this article we will focus on high graphics quality settings and will try to find out what CPU speed is sufficient for comfortable gameplay. We will also pay due attention to the budget processor models and overclocking efficiency.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...pu-games2.html

The Senile Doctor · 18th November 2005, 15:30

stressing what we know, that all games in our resolutions are 100% gpu dependent, so we really don't need more horsepower in the cpu department, whether you have an a64 3000+ or a fx57 or an overclocked p4@4ghz, games don't care if you're playing at 1280*1024, f*fsaa, 8*af or higher...

no need for new cpu's

jmke · 18th November 2005, 15:41

www.liveforspeed.net single player with AI eats CPU power, even your mighty 3Ghz FX will have problems with a full field of cars at full detail; the GPU is not taxed a lot (ATI 9800Pro allows you to play 1280x1024 2xAA/8xAF)

The Senile Doctor · 18th November 2005, 18:03

you have found one exception (maybe you'll even find a 2nd one) that confirms the rule!

187(V)URD@ · 18th November 2005, 18:21

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...cpu-games.html

18th November 2005, 20:12

still no minimum FPS :/

jmke · 19th November 2005, 15:48

unlike what you might think.. the world does not revolve around minimum FPS but average FPS and good playability

19th November 2005, 16:16

minimum FPS say a lot more about playability than average FPS

piotke · 19th November 2005, 16:23

so your hard disk is acting slow or slower, and you get for a period of 2 seconds 20 fsp, but yiyr average is 75...

How will you judge this..

19th November 2005, 16:28

That sucks, because I will notice the 20 FPS period as choppy. Need more ram then so there is no swapping.

Games capped at 60 FPs per default are something positive as well because the FPS drops are smaller and therefore less noticable.

12th November 2005, 15:39	#1
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,021	Games against CPUs. Part II We decided to write an update to our CPU gaming performance analysis. In this article we will focus on high graphics quality settings and will try to find out what CPU speed is sufficient for comfortable gameplay. We will also pay due attention to the budget processor models and overclocking efficiency. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...pu-games2.html __________________

18th November 2005, 15:30	#2
The Senile Doctor Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is Posts: 3,171	stressing what we know, that all games in our resolutions are 100% gpu dependent, so we really don't need more horsepower in the cpu department, whether you have an a64 3000+ or a fx57 or an overclocked p4@4ghz, games don't care if you're playing at 12801024, ffsaa, 8*af or higher... no need for new cpu's __________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world

18th November 2005, 15:41	#3
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,021	www.liveforspeed.net single player with AI eats CPU power, even your mighty 3Ghz FX will have problems with a full field of cars at full detail; the GPU is not taxed a lot (ATI 9800Pro allows you to play 1280x1024 2xAA/8xAF) __________________

18th November 2005, 18:03	#4
The Senile Doctor Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is Posts: 3,171	you have found one exception (maybe you'll even find a 2nd one) that confirms the rule! __________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world

18th November 2005, 18:21	#5
187(V)URD@ Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 923	http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...cpu-games.html __________________ AMD Opteron 146@3ghz H2O Storm \| DFI NF4 Ultra-D \| 2512MB Gskill LE \| X800GTO²@X850XT-PE \| 2250GB Hitachi \| Modded Aopen H600B\| Seasonic 600W \| MX510@450HZ \| 19\" TFT BenQ 937s+ \|3DMARK2001 AMD XP2400+@2600+ \| Epox 8rda+ \| 2*256 Twinmos BH5 \| Club3D 9600Pro \| Maxtor 80GB + 200GB \| server + moviestation \|

18th November 2005, 20:12	#6
Rutar Posts: n/a	still no minimum FPS :/

19th November 2005, 15:48	#7
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,021	unlike what you might think.. the world does not revolve around minimum FPS but average FPS and good playability __________________

19th November 2005, 16:16	#8
Rutar Posts: n/a	minimum FPS say a lot more about playability than average FPS

19th November 2005, 16:23	#9
piotke [M] Reviewer Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 5,003	so your hard disk is acting slow or slower, and you get for a period of 2 seconds 20 fsp, but yiyr average is 75... How will you judge this.. __________________ .

19th November 2005, 16:28	#10
Rutar Posts: n/a	That sucks, because I will notice the 20 FPS period as choppy. Need more ram then so there is no swapping. Games capped at 60 FPs per default are something positive as well because the FPS drops are smaller and therefore less noticable.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Holiday Buyers Guide, Part I: CPUs, GPUs, Mobos, and RAM	Sidney	WebNews	1	28th November 2007 20:17
Games against CPUs. Part II.	Sidney	WebNews	0	12th November 2005 06:13
Contemporary CPUs and New Games: No Way to Delusions!	Sidney	WebNews	3	10th November 2005 17:04
India to take pole position in games development market	Sidney	WebNews	0	11th July 2005 11:45
Intel dual core may play games slower	jmke	WebNews	0	18th March 2005 12:02
2K Games Picks Up Carmageddon, Reservoir Dogs & Conflict: Global Terror	jmke	WebNews	0	17th February 2005 15:58