Anyone hear of any games that will top crysis in graphics?

[Akubane]

I've never had to turn down any settings in warehead, or farcry 2. That being said:

In my opinion, Yes, the graphical superiority is enough to justify the drop in FPS. I agree with zmatts take on farcry 2's bland visuals. The fire and weather are nice, but that's it.

Another thing I didn't see mentioned at all, is that at 30FPS warhead feels and runs Just like far cry 2 does at 60 fps. I'm assuming it's because the lack of significant motion blurring in far cry 2, but it doesn't matter anyway.

I won't even bother arguing about the physics again.

All said and done, the thread is about games that top warhead in graphics. Right now, there aren't any. Farcry 2 doesn't make the list. Fallout 3 doesn't either.
Alan wake Might.. but who knows. it might be set up like resident evil games where it's all just painted on and you can't actually go anywhere.

 

[Gabb]

Gabb....crysis and warhead are not very cpu dependent.

That thread is flat out real world performance whether you like it or not.

Anandtech doesn't matter here...we are talking real world performance. Everybody overclocks...if you dont you get left behind in the dust. All those scores are people from here who run everyday rigs, not benchmark machines.

Im not trying to make you feel bad im just telling you how it is.

This is a run with a GTX 260 and a dual core at just 3ghz:
http://www.techist.com/forums/1482538-post325.html

Yes, thats 60fps on very high...actually better than a 9800GX2 and its a single GTX 260.

Wow I don't even have to prove you wrong...your own links prove you wrong: ( please address my numbered points, this will keep you from going off on some tangent topic that I'm not focusing on )

1. His settings are not on very high they are set on high and hes on DX9 which can't do very high unless he has the hack which i doubt it

2. His Avg FPS was 60, Anandtechs average FPS was 43.8 FOR 1280x1024 resolution which is the resolution he was set at. Since he OCed his card the numbers aren't that far off so Anandtech actually proves their tests are in accordinance with the results of a member from this forum.

3. You claim Nosboosts tests are real world and that Anandtechs are not...well if their benches aren't real world then...what are they? The virtual world? No offense to Nosboost ( whos results actually prove Anandtechs findings ) but I would always trust a professional site like anandtech and their superior testing methods over some guy over the internet doing an uncontrolled experiment.

it makes me wonder if you even looked at the link you posted

Download the old crysis benchmark tool and run it at the same settings an youll see. If you don't wanna do that then there's nothing i can do to convince you that the GTX cards are just better.

Again! your putting words in my mouth, show me ANYWHERE in all my post history where I said the 8800 GTX was better then the GTX 260/280. I respect your knowledge in some areas, but your posts are flat out getting ridiculous now with the irrelevant claims responding to something I'm not even saying. Its almost like your dying inside to argue with someone who claims that older cards are better then new ones...well I'm sorry to say but I, nor any reasonable person I know would make that claim.

And i never stated GTX runs two times better...even though they really do. I will provide you with the facts and i will not misguide anybody on these forums

QUOTED from ricanflow:
"9800GX2 will run it with double the framerate. So will GTX series cards. "

Is this NOT implying that the GTX cards run 2x better? ( its assumed that the best measure of performance is in frame rate ). I'm sorry rican, you are very knowledgable in many areas of computing, but I think your flat out misleading the community by some of your claims such as the GTX 260 is 2x faster then the 8800 gtx when in fact its only 23% faster in Crysis. Thats a PRETTY big margin of error to make a big deal about ( which is why I'm making a big deal about it ).

PS: The Anandtechs test was concerning Crysis, not Crysis:Warhead which may put higher fps numbers. However if thats the case, then the 8800 GTX can reasonable be assumed to have higher fps as well, hence the FACT, which is against what you say and that FACT is: The GTX 260 at stock settings does NOT have 2x the performance of a 8800 GTX at stock settings in Crysis, but around 23% more performance, which is a far off differance from 2x.

Lastly ill try to find that exact version of the Crysis Benchmark he had and run it on my stock 8800 gtx ( which is by now can be considered defective because of the thermal paste seperation issue ). It is however will make little differance and hard to compare because he OCed his GTX 260, ill see what I get however.

 

[zmatt]

Again! your putting words in my mouth, show me ANYWHERE in all my post history where I said the 8800 GTX was better then the GTX 260/280. I respect your knowledge in some areas, but your posts are flat out getting ridiculous now with the irrelevant claims responding to something I'm not even saying. Its almost like your dying inside to argue with someone who claims that older cards are better then new ones...well I'm sorry to say but I, nor any reasonable person I know would make that claim.

No he isn't your trying to change the argument. You didn't say the 8800GTX was faster. You said the gtx260 wasn't that much faster. And he is proving you wrong.

 

[ricanflow]

1. His settings are not on very high they are set on high and hes on DX9 which can't do very high unless he has the hack which i doubt it

I meant to say high, not very high.

Sorry for the confusion.

2. His Avg FPS was 60, Anandtechs average FPS was 43.8 FOR 1280x1024 resolution which is the resolution he was set at. Since he OCed his card the numbers aren't that far off so Anandtech actually proves their tests are in accordinance with the results of a member from this forum.

Again lets forget about Anandtech and focus on the data that we have and is proven here on the forums.

3. You claim Nosboosts tests are real world and that Anandtechs are not...well if their benches aren't real world then...what are they? The virtual world? No offense to Nosboost ( whos results actually prove Anandtechs findings ) but I would always trust a professional site like anandtech and their superior testing methods over some guy over the internet doing an uncontrolled experiment.

Real world to me means a gaming machine which is used daily, not a machine soley for the purpose of running benchmarks. His runs and any of the runs in the thread are real world and valid, because we are actually running them.

I prefer to get results from someone here than a review site.

Again! your putting words in my mouth, show me ANYWHERE in all my post history where I said the 8800 GTX was better then the GTX 260/280. I respect your knowledge in some areas, but your posts are flat out getting ridiculous now with the irrelevant claims responding to something I'm not even saying. Its almost like your dying inside to argue with someone who claims that older cards are better then new ones...well I'm sorry to say but I, nor any reasonable person I know would make that claim.

Im not saying you did.

Im simply saying that you are pulling numbers from sites and you wont accept the fact the the performance increase is around 50%. And you cant base it off one game either. And if you wanna pull numbers i can show you in F@H that a core 216 can get 8000ppd while an 8800GTX gets half that.

It wont always be that high...cause not all games are designed to take advantage of the extra shading power yet. The card is just that powerful.

But is that not a 50% performance increase?

Dual 8800GT's/9800GT's in SLI are on par with a GTX 260 and a single card is on par with the 8880GTX and beats it most of the time.

QUOTED from ricanflow:
"9800GX2 will run it with double the framerate. So will GTX series cards. "

Is this NOT implying that the GTX cards run 2x better? ( its assumed that the best measure of performance is in frame rate ). I'm sorry rican, you are very knowledgable in many areas of computing, but I think your flat out misleading the community by some of your claims such as the GTX 260 is 2x faster then the 8800 gtx when in fact its only 23% faster in Crysis. Thats a PRETTY big margin of error to make a big deal about ( which is why I'm making a big deal about it ).

You told me you got around 30fps. I linked you the benchmark tool so you can show me what your framerate is, yet you still choose to not run it.

Nosboost has a regular GTX 260 overclocked. Theres also the core 216 which is even faster. Run the tool and show me a screenshot of your actual average framerate...if it really is around 30fps than 60fps is twice the performance hence 50% increase over an 8800GTX.

 

[Gabb]

No he isn't your trying to change the argument. You didn't say the 8800GTX was faster. You said the gtx260 wasn't that much faster. And he is proving you wrong.

His words: "If you don't wanna do that then there's nothing i can do to convince you that the GTX cards are just better."

He isn't saying they are significantly better in that specific statement statement , he is merely stating they are better, which I was addressing specifically. Although he is saying in his argument they are 2x better, he isn't in that particular specific statement that I quoted and responded too. If your going to chime in, make sure you actually read the posts before you mindlessly defend him.

Again lets forget about Anandtech and focus on the data that we have and is proven here on the forums.

Its really funny how you say that because so many people have used that link like the holy grail, why do you think I have it on my favorites? They are professionals and do testing methods near the best ways it can be done, that is undeniable.

Real world to me means a gaming machine which is used daily, not a machine soley for the purpose of running benchmarks. His runs and any of the runs in the thread are real world and valid, because we are actually running them.

hmmm so your saying they use some mythological benchmark machine that somehow allows the 8800 gtx to come within 23% performance from a GTX 260? but on normal everyday peoples gaming machines it has more then a 2x advantage?...right...thats SOME COINCIDENCE! you should start your own tech site to disprove them wrong since apparently they are completely wrong on this. Bottom line is either your horrribly wrong or they are horribly wrong, but one thing is clear...someone is horribly wrong and I intend on finding out the truth on this matter.

Im simply saying that you are pulling numbers from sites and you wont accept the fact the the performance increase is around 50%. And you cant base it off one game either. And if you wanna pull numbers i can show you in F@H that a core 216 can get 8000ppd while an 8800GTX gets half that.

It wont always be that high...cause not all games are designed to take advantage of the extra shading power yet. The card is just that powerful.

But is that not a 50% performance increase?

Dual 8800GT's/9800GT's in SLI are on par with a GTX 260 and a single card is on par with the 8880GTX and beats it most of the time.

You told me you got around 30fps. I linked you the benchmark tool so you can show me what your framerate is, yet you still choose to not run it.

Nosboost has a regular GTX 260 overclocked. Theres also the core 216 which is even faster. Run the tool and show me a screenshot of your actual average framerate...if it really is around 30fps than 60fps is twice the performance hence 50% increase over an 8800GTX.

you'll notice I chose my words very carefully ( while you on the other hand have not and carelessly throw irrelevant comments my way and put words in my mouth ), the entire time I was speaking of an 8800 gtx in terms of performance in the game Crysis and not any other game ( don't believe me? heres my statement again for your reference: ( "Not to mention the fact that a GTX 260 only runs 23% faster in Crysis compared to a 8800 GTX and a GTX 280 is only 51% so I don't know where your pulling these numbers from.
" ). I'll try my best to find his exact benchmark and run it like I said in my previous posts, I am not always at my home computer so please refrain from making comments like I won't do something and discredit me.

Also my observation of 32 fps in game has no correlation at all in a benchmark, I can get 200 fps if I stare at a wall is an example, we'll go by the benchmark score when I test it.

Lastly I would just like to say I really have NO reason for lying or secretly hoping the the gtx 260 is 2x faster then the 8800 gtx. I am not some kid in high school wishing my parents will get me a new graphic card, I actually have a job ( civil engineer to be more specific ) and make a pretty comfortable living. I could easily dish out the $200+ to upgrade to the GTX or 4800 series, but the reason I'm not is because I don't think the performance gains are that high and trust professional gaming sites over some random people on the internet who all have different computer setups with millions of different variables involved.

 

[zmatt]

^And now who is getting mean.

hmmm so your saying they use some mythological benchmark machine that somehow allows the 8800 gtx to come within 23% performance from a GTX 260? but on normal everyday peoples gaming machines it has more then a 2x advantage?...right...thats SOME COINCIDENCE! you should start your own tech site to disprove them wrong since apparently they are completely wrong on this. Bottom line is either your horrribly wrong or they are horribly wrong, but one thing is clear...someone is horribly wrong and I intend on finding out the truth on this matter.

That is just rude. But no that isn't what he is saying. The test bed machines that they use on sites like Anandtech are built on the spot with clean installations of windows and nothing else. The machines we have hear are our day to day machines. They have a lot more going on and thus can be a more accurate reflection of real world performance. I really don't think you can find much truth on any hardware matter Gabb. You argue semantics and you lack the understanding of the hardware and the industry at large. Everytime you talk hardware you end up ****ing off a lot of people because what you say is so off the wall we must react.

The GTX260 is a lot faster than the 8800GTX, and I can believe it being 2x as fast. It takes 2 8800gtxs to match it so why not? I don't know what you did to get that card but you defend it like tis the best thing ever.

 

[Ste]

Im watching...

And no Im not santa

 

[Jorsoft]

Thread is 2 steps away from being closed. Stop the flames and get it back on topic or it gets locked. Simple as that.

 

[ricanflow]

Man Gabb you really had to take it out of hand.

Anyways....warhead is pretty much on top of graphics at the moment.

 

[Gabb]

^And now who is getting mean.

How is that mean I'm merely using extreme sarcasm and painting the portrait in words of the claim he was suggestion, whats mean is you saying my opinion means nothing.

That is just rude. But no that isn't what he is saying. The test bed machines that they use on sites like Anandtech are built on the spot with clean installations of windows and nothing else. The machines we have hear are our day to day machines. They have a lot more going on and thus can be a more accurate reflection of real world performance. I really don't think you can find much truth on any hardware matter Gabb. You argue semantics and you lack the understanding of the hardware and the industry at large. Everytime you talk hardware you end up ****ing off a lot of people because what you say is so off the wall we must react.

The GTX260 is a lot faster than the 8800GTX, and I can believe it being 2x as fast. It takes 2 8800gtxs to match it so why not? I don't know what you did to get that card but you defend it like tis the best thing ever.

Hmmm so wouldn't test bed machines with clean installations of windows have INCREASED performance over every day gaming machines which aren't so "clean" so to say? You would have known this if you actually clicked on the links we posted but your too quick to mindlessly defend and go against my opinion you haven't done either.

I can't believe the GTX 260 is 2x faster then a 8800 GTX at stock settings because anandtech showed its only 23% faster and thats too much of a performance different, someone has to be wrong.

Lastly if anyone thinks I have taken this out of hand, well then I am quite surprised because I don't think it has been taken out of hand at all. How is it a flame war? I have not thrown any insults, I have not called anyones opinions meaningless ( unlike some ). In fact I found this debate rather entertaining and I will be posting benchmark results shortly.