So - whats your FPS on the new Black Death track?

[mazex]

UPDATED 2011-05-04 as I got all my new stuff....

Hi!

Below is a rather interesting study of what affects CoD performance. Used my old rig, my old rig with my new GPU and finally my new rig...

The "rules":

* CoD settings to "default" high settings with no AA, SSAO or anti epilepsy.
* Start the Fraps benchmark as soon as the track has started, and stop it the second the track is done. Don't forget to turn off "Stop benchmark after 60 seconds"!
* I used 1680x1050 resolution - so set that for correct comparison!

On my old system I got this:

Core2Duo E8400@3.3 - GTX275 - 6 GB DDR2 800Mhz - P45Mb

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6851, 218058, 9, 69, 31.418


My old rig with my new GPU - only gained 1.9 fps in average! Sure CPU limited - the weird thing is that both cores are never above 70% load, most of the time at ~30-60%

Core2Duo E8400@3.3 - GTX580 - 6 GB DDR2 800Mhz - P45Mb

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
7230, 217293, 13, 70, 33.273


And then - my new rig in full glory (same GFX card as above):

i7 2600k @ 4.5 - GTX580 - 8 GB DDR3 1600Mhz - P67 Mb

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
14867, 216997, 22, 168, 68.512


All on Windows 7 x64

Anyone else with a score to share according to the "rules" above?

[Langnasen]

If you're going to clock that to 4.5ghz remember to disable HT in the BIOS or you'll have temp problems. Disable HT anyway, it's rubbish in games and bugger all real use anywhere else unless you're a professional image/footage/music editor or sumthin.

[mazex]

If you're going to clock that to 4.5ghz remember to disable HT in the BIOS or you'll have temp problems. Disable HT anyway, it's rubbish in games and bugger all real use anywhere else unless you're a professional image/footage/music editor or sumthin.

Thanks for the advice. I was so close to buying the i5 for that reason but as the price difference is so small anyway I bought is for "future use", and will disable HT as you said and hope I will get some use of it some time ;) At least I have a bit more L3 cache :)

[Langnasen]

That was why I went for the 2500k, spending the extra for a feature that I'd never use AND would cause issues in getting a good OC didn't make a lot of sense (though I was tempted for the reasons you give). The extra cache doesn't make any difference either according to benchmarks. The onboard graphics are a waste too, don't know what Intel were thinking of with that.

[lbuchele]

I had Min 19 Max 152 everything Maxed , SSAO turned off 1920x1200 res

[mazex]

I had Min 19 Max 152 everything Maxed , SSAO turned off 1920x1200 res

Sounds good! And the average?

[choctaw111]

This will be an interesting thread and am looking forward to reading more.

[Rattlehead]

Using your settings above, (1900x1080)

Min-0
Avg-31
Max-93

Intel dual core@3ghz
Ati 5870
4 gig ram
wind 7 64-bit

[Seeker]

What Black Death trap??

[Heinz Laube]

min 2...avg 40... max 102 on default high setting

1920*1080

[smellydad]

Wish I'd waited a few months for a Sandy Bridge :rolleyes:

On default high settings, no AA or SSAO etc.

Min - 10

Max - 131

Avg - 59.155

Everything at very high, 8 x AA (supposedly) and SSAO on:

Min - 9

Max - 99

Avg - 48.498

i7 950@3.5GHz
6GB DDR3
GTX580 1.5GB

[Dano]

Everything turned up to full except SSAO off, Epilepsy off, AAx1 @ 1680x1050 on an i5 2500k, 8gb ddr3 1600, 560ti 1gb.

Avg - 53
Max - 127
Min - 15

[etzi]

Thats all bs, if everybody uses other resolutions and options.

Please fix the settings and resolution for a comparison.

[lbuchele]

Sounds good! And the average?
I don't know,I registered the Min and Max looking at the screen,but I need to learn where the damn fraps is storing the data from benchmark.
What's the correct setting to do the MinAvgMax reading?
EDIT:Both Min and Max readings was there for a second,mostly of the time it's around 76 fps, when the Bf 110 are aproaching to atack,48 fps more or less,the bombs exploding around 30 or something

[mazex]

So - now I got my GTX580 (and all the other stuff accept the Obsidian 650D chassis which will arrive in "two weeks"! Doh!).

Never the less - now I could do the interesting test of throwing in a GTX580 in my old rig to try how CPU limited it is - and YES it sure is ;)


My old setup and score:

Core2Duo E8400@3.3 - GTX275 - 6 GB DDR2 800Mhz - P45Mb
-------------------------------------------------------
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6851, 218058, 9, 69, 31.418
-------------------------------------------------------

My new setup and score (just swapped the GTX275 for a GTX580 which should be a LOT faster):

Core2Duo E8400@3.3 - GTX580 - 6 GB DDR2 800Mhz - P45Mb
-------------------------------------------------------
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
7230, 217293, 13, 70, 33.273
-------------------------------------------------------

So I gained ~1.9 fps in average :)

Updated my original post too...

[Rattlehead]

Let us know how it fares if you install the new beta patch. Congrats on the new hardware.

[mazex]

Let us know how it fares if you install the new beta patch. Congrats on the new hardware.

Thanks :)

I get 15 min, 78 max and 37 average with the new patch according to my rules - a good improvement. The interesting thing is that I get 60 - 70 fps 500 feet over Dover where I previously was on 30 - 40 (old gpu and 305 patch). The fps increase is awsome! So the limiting factor in the black death track is much less the GPU than in the "real" game...

[broken pixel]

52 64 58.074
XFX6990 @ 990mhZ 1375mhZ

: (

[broken pixel]

52 64 58.074
XFX6990 @ 990mhZ 1375mhZ

: (

Forgot to add a screen shot- -
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a185/c152pilot/IMG_8511.jpg

[mazex]

So, now my new rig is ready, score according to the original rules - but with the latest patch:

Specs in sig:

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
14867, 216997, 22, 168, 68.512

An average of 68.5 works for me on high :) So obviously this game needs a good CPU as the same GPU in my old Core 2 Duo rig was very far from this score...

Updated first post too.

[mazex]

If you're going to clock that to 4.5ghz remember to disable HT in the BIOS or you'll have temp problems. Disable HT anyway, it's rubbish in games and bugger all real use anywhere else unless you're a professional image/footage/music editor or sumthin.

Got to 4.9 Ghz with HT on and 1.375 volts. Going to 5.0 at 1.375 volts it was not stable so I disabled HT and went to 1.4 volts (rather modest volt) and got stable 5.0 Ghz on full Prime95 for an hour. As the temps where at 67-68 degreees I decided to call it a day and went back to my desired 4.5 at 1.25 volts. After Prime95 all night it was at 55 degrees and rock stable - with HT on... I love this little piece of silicon ;)

using a Noctua NH-D14 air cooler and Obsidian 650D chassis.

[Rattlehead]

Got to 4.9 Ghz with HT on and 1.375 volts. Going to 5.0 at 1.375 volts it was not stable so I disabled HT and went to 1.4 volts (rather modest volt) and got stable 5.0 Ghz on full Prime95 for an hour. As the temps where at 67-68 degreees I decided to call it a day and went back to my desired 4.5 at 1.25 volts. After Prime95 all night it was at 55 degrees and rock stable - with HT on... I love this little piece of silicon ;)

using a Noctua NH-D14 air cooler and Obsidian 650D chassis.

Impressive.

I don't know what I like more: your cpu, cooler or case. :)

[Rattlehead]

So, now my new rig is ready, score according to the original rules - but with the latest patch:

Specs in sig:

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
14867, 216997, 22, 168, 68.512

An average of 68.5 works for me on high :) So obviously this game needs a good CPU as the same GPU in my old Core 2 Duo rig was very far from this score...

Updated first post too.

I know that you stated in another thread that you were getting 30 fps low over London...have you tried some bomber intercepts or dogfights over the city yet?

I'm interested to see if it's playable or not with your system.

[335th_GRAthos]

Got to 4.9 Ghz with HT on and 1.375 volts. Going to 5.0 at 1.375 volts it was not stable so I disabled HT and went to 1.4 volts (rather modest volt) and got stable 5.0 Ghz on full Prime95 for an hour. As the temps where at 67-68 degreees I decided to call it a day and went back to my desired 4.5 at 1.25 volts. After Prime95 all night it was at 55 degrees and rock stable - with HT on... I love this little piece of silicon ;)

using a Noctua NH-D14 air cooler and Obsidian 650D chassis.

Sorry if I missed reading a previous post (if any) Mazex, did you measure how much of the fps improvement is related to the overclocking from the stock speed to 4,5GHz?

~S~

[mazex]

I know that you stated in another thread that you were getting 30 fps low over London...have you tried some bomber intercepts or dogfights over the city yet?

I'm interested to see if it's playable or not with your system.

A video says more than a thousand words ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcOncOfB5AE

Completely smooth with no stuttering, and then Fraps steals like 10-20 fps at least. Without it the same mission is more in the 60-80 fps domain...

/mazex

[Rattlehead]

:!:

Indeed it does. Wow, that's very impressive.

[mazex]

Sorry if I missed reading a previous post (if any) Mazex, did you measure how much of the fps improvement is related to the overclocking from the stock speed to 4,5GHz?

~S~

Will try that (had it in my original test schedule ;)). The one I also intended on testing is my new rig with my old GTX275 card... The problem is that my 9 year old has already got his hands on the E8400 rig and plays Lego Universe on it ;) His old E6700 is it's turn now delegated to my 5 year old watching Dinosaur Kings on the net. That was bleeding edge hardware not that long ago!

It's good having an internal demand chain for old hardware with my sons even though my wife refuses to ditch her old Prescott rig as she claims it fits her needs, so no luck using that as an excuse! But then the media center which is also a Core 2 Duo is starting show it's age? Or maybe the 2008R2 Server in the basement? :)

[335th_GRAthos]

my 9 year old has already got his hands on the E8400 rig and plays Lego Universe on it ;) His old E6700 is it's turn now delegated to my 5 year old watching Dinosaur Kings on the net. That was bleeding edge hardware not that long ago!

It's good having an internal demand chain for old hardware with my sons even though my wife refuses to ditch her old Prescott rig as she claims it fits her needs, so no luck using that as an excuse! But then the media center which is also a Core 2 Duo is starting show it's age? Or maybe the 2008R2 Server in the basement? :)

ROFL !

a few years more and you will have to fix your main PC with a chain and lock and install an alarm system in your room.... ;)

[Flanker35M]

S!

That mirror OFF alone will give you 10-20fps Mazex :)

[mazex]

S!

That mirror OFF alone will give you 10-20fps Mazex :)

True :) I used to have it off on my old rig but now I can have it on as the fps is good enough anyway. And I had stated that I have great fps on the default "high" setting so turning it off would be cheating ;)

[TonyD]

After some time-consuming testing with a number of different settings, many of which seem to have little impact on the average frame rate in Black Death, I use the following:

Resolution: 1920 x 1080, 50Hz (50Hz reduces the work load, with no visual impact at 2ms)
Full Screen: On
Model detail: High
Buildings Detail: Medium
Land Detail: Medium
Forest: Medium
Visual Effects: High
Texture Quality: High
Anti-Aliasing: 2x (no visual difference when increasing this)
Anti-Epilepsy Filter: Off
SSAO: Off
VSYNC: On (‘Off’ for the benchmark, reduces ‘tearing’ in game when panning around the cockpit)
Damage Decals: High
Buildings Amount: Medium
Land Shading: Medium
Grass: Off
Shadows: On
Roads: On

Black Death track, using the in-game fps display (avg, max, min): 39, 85, 15

I use the ‘Free Flight – England’ quick mission for in-game testing because of its combination of towns, forests and sea. With these settings I get a frame rate of 40 to 45 fps at around 1000 feet over Dover, dropping to ~35 fps when looking at the burning fuel depot (~28 fps close up) and at tree-top height. I don’t usually fly with the frame rate displayed when playing, but it is fluid enough to be immersive. It does appear that these settings do not result in the graphics memory demand exceeding what my card has, as there is no visible stuttering. I have noticed no increase in the LOD when increasing the ‘Buildings Amount’ setting (even to ‘Unlimited’), but this may have something to do with the amount of VRAM I have. With the above settings, the buildings are textured when they come into view (no initial brown boxes), except over London where this still happens, but I have the same frame rate here as I do over Dover.

My current driver version is 11.5, CCC 3D settings are all at default, game version is 1.00.14413 beta with a default ‘config.ini’ file. I use ‘Overdrive’ to tweak my card’s clocks to 775/1100, and ‘MSI AfterBurner’ to alter the cooling fan profile to achieve a max gpu temperature of 70⁰C under full load. At default speed, the cpu usage is approximately (Task Manager) 70%, 45%, 25% and 20% across the cores, and using VSYNC results in gpu usage varying between 60% and 80%. I have no problems running the game for hours – no CTD, BSD, freezes or graphic anomalies apart from the occasional long rectangles between land and sea (which have been around from the beginning, but are infrequent).

[Rattlehead]

I've resigned to having to upgrade my cpu this year, like it or not. I think I have somewhat underestimated the importance of the cpu in this game...my cpu is alright for small skirmishes, but it's not good for larger battles.

My video card is similar to your Tony and our settings are similar too, yet my average for the Black Death track is 8 fps less...a significant amount. I can only assume that your superior cpu is making the difference.