Tiger Woods Out...Until August!
 |
| | (Post a comment) » S.T.A.L.K.E.R. CPU Performance ExploredWhich CPU's perform best with S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and is the game more CPU-dependant or GPU-bound? Does quad-core matter? These are the types of questions we set out to answer in this article. We've used a combination of high-end and mainstream GPUs to see which processors perform best in this game with a given GPU. Read which CPUs deliver the best bang for the buck inside! |  Previous news article | Back to main news | Next news article  |
| 15 User Comment(s) • 6 root comment(s) |
 CaptNKILL (5)  Apr 13, 2007 - 02:06 am | Edited on Apr 13, 2007 - 02:06 am
| Well, as with the Oblivion CPU benchmark FS did last year, I don't think they benched in the right places. I sent a bunch of benchmark results to one of the FS reviewers about the CPU limitations of Oblivion last year.
Just like Oblivion, the game is extremely CPU heavy when looking toward large, complex city areas.
I have an 8800GTX, an Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.63Ghz and 2Gb of PC4000 DDR and the game slows to a crawl (15-30fps) in the areas around the Bar (the city) and the Freedom base. It doesn't matter what resolution I run at, and the graphics settings only have a minor impact.
One very VERY obvious place to test this is the southern entrance to the Bar area (not the Bar building itself, but that whole zone). Just leave the Garbage through the northern Duty outpost. When you arrive, look toward the city. It runs like crap when you look toward the city. The more of it you have on screen, the worse it runs. The only thing that seems to get rid of the slow down completely is to drop the draw distance all the way down so that the distant buildings aren't being shown.
I think its great that Firingsquad actually does CPU benchmarks since no one else seems to do them, but I think some extra time should be taken to find out if there are CPU limited areas in the game, not just if some random area is CPU limited. Most of the time the game runs pretty good for me (40-60fps at 1600x1200, 0xAA,16xAF, all settings maxed except grass density at half and grass shadows off) but its very difficult to aim properly in the CPU heavy areas around the cities, especially when turning in a circle gives me a range of 20 to 70fps depending on whats on screen.
Any chance we could get some additional results for a walk through of the Bar area from the Garbage loading zone (south) to the Wild Territory loading zone (north)? If I had another system with a faster CPU and similar specs I'd test it myself, but this is the only system I have thats really capable of running the game.» Login to reply to this |
 Trogdor (39) Apr 12, 2007 - 09:37 am
| Unlike the above posters, I loved the game. It's not perfect, but there have been a LOT of games that I haven't played through to the conclusion simply because I lose interest.
Anyway, my take is that CPU performance with any recent CPU is not going to really matter. For most people, the GPU is the bottleneck, but even for extreme GPU configurations you're left with a choice of liquid smooth 66+ FPS on a 3600+ of "even smoother" (not that you'd notice) 90+ FPS on stuff like the 6000+ and E6600 and faster.
Of course, you'll still get performance hiccups at times while the engine loads data. Would have been interesting to see minimum frame rates, but my experience is that with enough RAM the CPU won't impact that much either.» Login to reply to this |
DanTheMathlete (235)  Apr 11, 2007 - 08:42 am | Edited on Apr 11, 2007 - 12:01 pm
| » My Two Cents
Seems to me that the real issue is not how well does Stalker run (i.e. number of crashes and its other glaring flaws) but why is a game with some many problems even considered? Because the gamer is not a respected consumer. Just bandaid some POS code together irregardless of problems, ship it out and patch it later seems to be the m.o. of the industry because they know that if there is enough sparklies to dazzel us we will be distracted. As far as I can tell, not having played the game, is that this game has one thing going for it, the developer cared about content. That should be the minimum standard!?!?!?! not grounds for acclaim. I, for one, am tired of this and will not pay 40 dollars to trouble shoot a game that is already out of date just because there isn't anything better on the market.
I cant wait to update my CPU and Graphics card to play a game that takes advantage of half what the new components are capable of just because the developer decided that if they couldnt make a good game then they could make a game that brings modern components to their knees. If I write a program that I cant execute on my home computer it isn't cool, my fellow graduate students dont ew and aw, its simply badly coded and I need to fix it. Developers would be better off spending time developing games that can perform better on older components, thus increasing their potential market, than adding unnecessary eye candy that makes a game unplayable to many and obsolete in 6 months because it isnt replayable. Ground breaking and breath taking are great if you are Picasso, or one of a handfull of creative geniuses, but otherwise show some humility and aim lower. Try, well designed and thoughtfully crafted or enjoyable to play and runs rock solid.
Rant Rant Rant, TTHHHBBSSSS.» Login to reply to this Trogdor (39) Apr 12, 2007 - 09:45 am
| » Cry me a river
Nice: "As far as I can tell, not having played the game..."
In other words, you're judging a game by what a bunch of whiny pricks on the Internet are saying without having ever tried it. Will, I don't care about multiplayer at all, but the single player was a very good experience. If you think it's easy to make perfect code for GAMES (pathetic little CS projects in school don't count).... wow!
A great game that you only play once is still a great game. The engine looks plenty good even though there are better looking games now. I'm a gamer first and foremost, however, so I'd take awesome gameplay with mediocre to decent graphics over lousy gameplay with amazing graphics any day.
Finally, for what it's worth, the game crashed to the desktop once during my ~25 hours of running. That was prior to the patch; never had a problem post-patch with crashes. There are a few cosmetic bugs (like the PDA not showing quest markers - just enter the main map and then the regular PDA worked again), but most of the "bugs" that people are bitching about have more to do with the game not running fast on older hardware. Sorry, but that's not a bug, and despite what some might think optimizing for a vast amount of different hardware is very difficult. "OMG my GeForce 6600 can't run this game worth crap at 1680x1050! Waaaaah!" Aiming lower doesn't just apply to developers.» Login to reply to this |
|
» Note: You need to be logged in to write a comment!Login here, or if you don't have an account with FiringSquad, register here, it's FREE! |
  ATI Radeon 5970 Performance Preview
 After a 10-month hiatus, ATI's once again got the world's fastest graphics card. The Radeon 5970 fuses two RV870 chips onto one board for max performa... [+] (Comments) |  Left 4 Dead 2 PC Review
 Valve says Left 4 Dead 2 contains so much new content, it's worthy of a sequel rather than DLC. Is this true or false? Judge for yourself in today's r... [+] (Comments) |
Sapphire Radeon 5870 Vapor-X 1GB Review
 With its custom vapor chamber cooling+heatpipes and factory OC'ing, Sapphire's 5870 Vapor-X is targeted towards gamers looking for a 5870 card with a ... [+] (Comments) | Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 PC Review
 With no dedicated servers, no lean, and 18-player cap for multi, does Modern Warfare 2 for PC live up to its predecessors? Most of the reviews online ... [+] (Comments) |
Phenom II Gets A New Revision: 125W AMD Phenom II X4 965 Performance Preview
 Promising lower power consumption, lower temps, and most importantly for enthusiasts, more OC'ing, AMD is back with a new CPU revision for the Phenom ... [+] (Comments) | Dragon Age Origins Review
 |
AMD Athlon II X3 435/Athlon II X2 240e Performance Preview
 Today AMD is introducing 8 new Athlon II CPUs intended to service different segments of the budget CPU market. For HTPC users, new 45W dual, triple, a... [+] (Comments) | Shattered Horizon Review
 FutureMark, well known for their popular 3DMark benchmarks, is venturing into new territory with Shattered Horizon. This multiplayer shooter is perhap... [+] (Comments) |
| EVGA P55 FTW Review
 Looking for a good P55 motherboard to OC your CPU beyond 4GHz? If so, you may want to check out EVGA's P55 FTW. With its extra ATX12V connector, this ... [+] (Comments) | Borderlands PC Review
 Is it an RPG or is it an FPS? Borderlands blends the best elements of both in one entertaining package. Vandy has spent the past week playing the PC v... [+] (Comments) |
ATI Radeon HD 5770/5750 Performance Preview
 With prices ranging from $109-$159, ATI's Radeon 5700 series of cards bring DX11 gaming to mainstream price points and usher in new levels of energy e... [+] (Comments) | Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising Review
 While it's not the true sequel to Operation Flashpoint, Dragon Rising is billed as a modern tactical sim just like its predecessor. Does it live up to... [+] (Comments) |
Batman: Arkham Asylum PhysX Features and Performance
 One eye candy feature PC users can enjoy over the console edition of Batman: AA is PhysX. Rocksteady's PhysX implementation is more than just tearing ... [+] (Comments) | Batman: Arkham Asylum PC Review
 Already a smash hit on consoles, the PC version of Batman: Arkham Asylum sports better graphics and support for NVIDIA technologies PhysX and 3D Visio... [+] (Comments) |
ATI Radeon 5850 Performance Preview
 Not everyone's got $400 to spend on a shiny new Radeon 5870 card, which is why it can be argued that ATI's Radeon 5850 is the more relevant GPU for a ... [+] (Comments) | Resident Evil 5 PC Review
 Sporting a new mercenaries mode with more enemies on screen, higher resolution DX10 graphics, and 3D Vision support, Resident Evil 5 is definitely bes... [+] (Comments) |
| More Hardware » | More Games » | Interviews » |
| |
• This Month
• October 1 - 31, 2009
• September 1 - 30, 2009
• August 1 - 31, 2009
• July 1 - 31, 2009
• June 1 - 30, 2009
• May 1 - 31, 2009
• April 1 - 30, 2009
• March 1 - 31, 2009
• February 1 - 28, 2009
• January 1 - 31, 2009
• December 1 - 31, 2008
• November 1 - 30, 2008
|
|
|
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
SU
furl
