| Thread Tools |
2nd August 2006, 13:03 | #1 |
Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,020
| Real Gaming Challenge Rematch: Intel vs. AMD All games are run at a resolution of 1280x1024, with details turned up high. We wanted to test by running the games the way real gamers do—at a reasonably high resolution with all the eye candy turned on. The vast majority of monitors sold these days are either 17" or 19", and 1280x1024 is almost always the native resolution for these displays. We're using a high-quality, speedy, but affordable graphics card: a GeForce 7900 GT (currently costing less than $300). While we want to play the games the way people expect to be able to—with the graphics options turn up high—we didn't want the graphics card to be the limiting performance factor, so we never enabled anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering.
__________________ |
2nd August 2006, 13:04 | #2 |
Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,020
| "real gamers" will enable AA/AF if GPU performance allows it, and it still remains GPU limited with little to no impact from CPU except for the odd game like Oblivion and Rise of Legends
__________________ |
2nd August 2006, 13:08 | #3 |
Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,020
| let's analyse the table below: [attachment] Half Life: 113 or 86... both are playable, you won't notice the difference Oblivion: 2 FPS difference.. not quite worth mentioning BattleField 2: both well above playable FPS Ris of Legends: aha, noticeable difference here, this RTS is CPU dependant Titan Quest: both well above playable FPS World of WarCraft: no difference to sum things up; only in CPU limited games, does the CPU matter. what's new?
__________________ |
2nd August 2006, 16:05 | #4 |
Member Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,738
| so, no need to rush into Core 2 if you have A64 X2 with high end graphic card?
__________________ lazyman Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II |
2nd August 2006, 16:55 | #5 |
Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
| no need to rush into core 2 even with 2 1/2 year old fx53 with high end gpu
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
2nd August 2006, 17:26 | #6 |
Posts: n/a
| except your got money to waste they should have done it like FEAR tough, with % for several FPS ranges and min FPS |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Intel Says AMD Split Violates License Agreement | jmke | WebNews | 0 | 11th October 2008 14:51 |
AMD Introduces ‘AMD Business Class’, Designed With Business in Mind | jmke | WebNews | 0 | 28th April 2008 10:33 |
AMD Launches World’s First x86 Triple-Core Processors | jmke | WebNews | 0 | 27th March 2008 16:16 |
High Performance AMD Phenom™ X4 Processors Lead the Charge to HD Desktop Gaming and V | jmke | WebNews | 0 | 27th March 2008 16:09 |
AMD sues Intel, the monopolist | Sidney | WebNews | 6 | 29th June 2005 12:01 |
Final Update! - Dual Core Stress Test: AMD vs. Intel | Sidney | WebNews | 1 | 27th June 2005 08:55 |
ECS’ Mainboard for AMD and Intel Processors Previewed | jmke | WebNews | 0 | 14th May 2005 17:44 |
AMD reckons it has year lead over Intel on dual core | Sidney | WebNews | 0 | 12th May 2005 06:19 |
Intel Centrino brand weak, AMD thinks | Sidney | WebNews | 1 | 3rd February 2005 22:16 |
AMD chips edge ahead of Intel | Sidney | WebNews | 0 | 26th August 2004 07:47 |
Thread Tools | |
| |