News Headlines
- Sat, May 18
- Assassin's Creed movie, starring Michael Fassbender, coming to theaters Memorial Day 2015
- Fri, May 17
- Dust: An Elysian Tail hitting PC May 24, the Blade of Ahrah and the power it controls awaits
- PC port of Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance confirmed, no release date given
- The Wonderful 101's not so wonderful release date announced, pushed to September 15
- Trion Worlds, developer for MMOs RIFT and Defiance, suffers heavy layoffs
New Articles
Related Articles
The BFG GTX 295 performs well in probably the two most important benchmarks here, the Vantage score and the fill rate bench, but slips a bit in the other benches, and completely stumbles in the particles test.
next: Far Cry 2 »
Article Index |
|
I've kicked Crysis to the curb now. Instead, *surprise surprise* it will be replaced with Crysis Warhead, for all the new benchmarks.
I'm also adding a demoscene demo, 'Raiders of the Lost Art', which makes a good bench. So that'll be 12 total benchmarks, which is where I want to be.
But ya, short story is: It's all my fault.
I really do think Crysis (though substituting in Warhead isn't a bad idea) is an important benchmark (and will be, for a while), since it has bloated requirements.
I mean, for pretty much every game on the list, the FPS when the resolution is maxed out, with AA, is just gravy. You're, for the time being, paying extra for legligble performance gains. Just because the best card gets like, 30 or more FPS over the worst performer, doesn't mean much when the worst performer gets enough FPS that it produces smooth gaming.
Crysis (and to a lesser degree Warhead) is a GPU pounder. Being able to run Crysis at high resolution, with AA, and good FPS performance would allow this GPU to show it's worth (assuming it could do that with Crysis, which you think it would be able to).
But you couldn't help it, what with Crysis DRM not playing nice >_>