» Login to reply to this

doomtrooper (741)    Nov 27, 2006 - 02:45 pm

You have too much money and can't burn it fast enough in a huge fire pit? » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

deimos47 (434)    Nov 25, 2006 - 10:38 pm

"So does this mean that if I have a Athlon 64 SINGLE core 3800+ @2.4ghz, getting say a GF7900GT and this GF8800GTS would make no difference what soever?" Short answer, no (it would make big difference). Even in the very few games that are multithreaded, the gains are relatively small. Your processor is still quite good. At low resolutions with lower quality settings, folks with Core2 Duo running 2.6 even 3Ghz, might have double the kind of frame rates with 8800GTS as you would. But, at very high resolutions and maximum quality settings, even your processor can perform nearly same as 3Ghz Core2Duo. LESSON: For 8800's, crank up resolution and quality sliders till it bleeds! That's what they're meant for. » Login to reply to this  asdfqwerty (969)    Nov 27, 2006 - 01:12 pm Me, I'd rather use the lowest resolution possible with the lowest quality setting, so that I can at least have bragging rights about having the fastest processor and highest framerates... or maybe not. :p » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

GX-Brandon (369)   Nov 26, 2006 - 07:03 am

No, performance is probably down in that case because of the CPU. But again, don't make comparisons between this article and the original article... » Login to reply to this  Matas (6)   Nov 26, 2006 - 10:39 am If it's CPU than it's really strange... Waiting for Core 2 Duos review:) » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

egglick (123)    Nov 25, 2006 - 12:43 pm

I don't know if it's the drivers so much as the different AA and AF settings. You guys used 4xAA/16xAF across the board in the Athlon scaling article, but with the Core 2, you used alot of 8xAF and even ran 0xAA on a couple of the tests. My opinion is that the large performance penalties often seen with 16xAF aren't worth the negligable difference in IQ. I would've rather seen 8xAF used across the board, but since you used 16x throughout the Athlon article you might as well stick with it (if you choose to do a Core 2 one as well). » Login to reply to this  GX-Brandon (369)   Nov 26, 2006 - 06:02 am egg: Yes, that is true too, I did go to 16xAF across the board, whereas the Core 2 article I didn't. Perhaps that would be another good poll question? I did it to save myself some time, if I mixed in 8xAF and other settings in there the article would've taken even longer to publish. I figured since these were all high-end cards that I might as well crank up the AF. » Login to reply to this

Nyquist (106)    Nov 25, 2006 - 01:21 pm

I've not really noticed before but on your "Test Systems" page you list the version of some games used but not others. » Login to reply to this  GX-Brandon (369)   Nov 26, 2006 - 07:04 am Normally I cut and paste the system setup page, but I always try to patch to the latest versions of games when testing. » Login to reply to this

» Note: You need to be logged in to write a comment!