80

FFXIV Benchmark has done me a favor.

I ran the FFXIV Official Benchmark today on m computer that is about two years old.  Some of you may remember that I upgraded right around the time Age of Conan came out.  The results weren’t so great.

FFXIV looks really nice.  Even in the alpha videos there wasn’t much to complain about graphically other than the art style which isn’t the same thing anyway.  Unfortunately, I won’t even get a chance to play it and see for myself.

According to the Benchmark, my score is 1307.

Looking at the scale:

[8000 and over] Extremely High Performance
Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
[5500–7999] Very High Performance
Easily capable of running the game. Should perform exceptionally well, even at higher resolutions.
[4500-5499] High Performance
Easily capable of running the game. Should perform well, even at higher resolutions.
[3000-4499] Fairly High Performance
Capable of running the game on default settings. Consider switching to a higher resolution depending on performance.
[2500-2999] Standard Performance
Capable of running the game on default settings.
[2000-2499] Slightly Low Performance
Capable of running the game, but may experience some slowdown. Adjust settings to improve performance.
[1500-1999] Low Performance
Capable of running the game, but will experience considerable slowdown. Adjusting settings is unlikely to improve performance.
[Under 1500] Insufficient Performance
Does not meet specifications for running the game.

My computer, which runs any game I want to play right now above 30 frames (most closer to 50 or 60) on high settings, won’t be able to even meet the specifications for running FFXIV. Maybe it’s poorly coded benchmark? I hope? I’m not going out to upgrade for FFXIV when my computer performs without so much as a hitch in any game, let alone a MMO. I’m not alone because there are a lot of people out there posting that they can’t play the game.

Until I hear that there’s something terribly wrong with the benchmark, this thing has done me a favor by allowing me to know early that I won’t be able to play.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Reddit0Share on Google+1
Blacknimbus - June 16, 2010

Curious…what are your specs, generally speaking?

Rybnik - June 16, 2010

I haven’t been able to run teh benchmark yet on my home computer, but I have a feeling my situation will be much like the one your in Keen. I can play anything my heart desires mmo wise right now on the highest possible setting without any trouble, so I’m sure this benchmanrk will trash my machine as well. Hopefully we will get some clarification on this from squenix. If these benchmarks do turn out to be accurate then I predict an AoC-ish launch.

GreenArmadillo - June 16, 2010

My machine (Core 2 Duo 6600, 4 GB ram, 9600 GSO) came in somewhere in the mid 1600’s. That does seem like an aggressive spec to push, my rig is over three years now (minus the graphics card, which had to be replaced recently), but I don’t think it’s totally bringing up the rear specwise.

I wonder if a console will be a viable option?

Wren - June 16, 2010

Yeah, their expectations seem to be pretty high. Even my buddy, who has a semi-new machine (Summer 2008 – just 4 months before I built my current machine), got a 1943. I’m going to have to restart my box and test mine. I’ve already tested high and low once and got a 1400 and 1263 respectively, but my machine’s resources are probably eaten up because it hasn’t been restarted in almost a week. I’ll have to restart and try again.

I hope, for their sake, that they release on consoles, because right now it seems like you’re going to have to have a monster system behind it to get the level of detail most players are going to expect. At least on a console it won’t be such an issue for the user.

I’ll still probably stick to SW: TOR. FFXI left a bad taste in my mouth and, although this game is no doubt an improvement, I’m not going to make the investment (in hours or dollars) to give it a go.

Bloatgoat - June 16, 2010

vanguard launch all over again, and a shame too, vanguard is an amazing game

Bartlebe - June 16, 2010

They did you a favor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eONoACmL5AM&feature=player_embedded

Watch this video and tell me that isn’t the most boring thing you’ve ever seen.

Phandy - June 16, 2010

@Keen I assume you wrote this before you read my PM?

@Bart That combat system hasn’t even been tested yet… its the Beta version and they are still testing Alpha. However it is a VAST improvement over the Alpha version and from all reports is only a tad slower then WoWs combat.

UFTimmy - June 16, 2010

3676.

I have a fairly nice computer, I just built it last month. It’s a i7 930 with an Intel X-25 160 gig solid state hard drive.

This 3676 was running on my secondary video card, as my first (a GTX 470) just died on Sunday. I imagine I would have gotten a better score with that, although my processor never went beyond 30% and the GPU chip hovered around 85%.

RevMrBlack - June 16, 2010

I got a score of 2312, running the 1920×1080 test. My PC is a Q6600 quad core, 4GB RAM, GTX 260 Superclocked, and W7 64-bit. But I’m also running a dual monitor display so that might have lowered my score.

I think the benchmark might be a bit poorly coded, or their scoring system slightly harder than normal. Cause I can play Shattered Horizon, the highest GFX requirement game out there now, at 30+ fps at 1920×1200.

But it’s not like I’d play FFXIV anyways, since I’ve never even played a FF game in my life. 😛

gankatron - June 16, 2010

You are not the only one who’s computer has hard drive performance issue, hopefully this can help:

http://www.trygve.com/viagra.html

Perhaps it is because your OS was developed by a company who’s name has micro and soft in it?

Bhagpuss - June 16, 2010

I bought my machine this year for around £600. Nothing special, barely even qualifies as a “gaming” machine by gamer standards.

I get well over 2000 on the benchmark. I forget exactly what it was, something around 2300 Ithink. I’d have thought if my very middle-of-the-road PC can run FFXIV, anyone likely to be reading this blog would have no trouble. Makes me wonder if the Benchmark is working properly.

Kim - June 16, 2010

I had 2409 running an x295 at max resolution on a 1 year old computer. I can run all games at max without any problems at all, so it’s definitely something wrong with those benchmark requirements.

Russell Gusto - June 16, 2010

I got 1480…meh

Higgs - June 16, 2010

Im getting over 3000 with a 2yrs+ computer, nothing special.

You just need to upgrade your vid card to some of the latest mainstream ones and youll double your score. No need for the high end ones, a GTX465 would be just great.

~Higgs

Xtinct - June 16, 2010

I got a 2246 and that is with an old 2.4 athlon x2. I do have it overclocked though to 2.8 and also a 285gtx video card. I will be upgrading my computer well before FFXIV comes out.

Alice - June 16, 2010

CPU: Core2Duo P8700 2.53Ghz~
GPU: Radeon HD 4650
RAM: 4096 MB (4gb)
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

My Score: 1495

I guess if I end up deciding to play it, it would have to be on the ps3.

Sentry - June 16, 2010

CPU: Core2Duo E7500 OC to 3.6ghz
GPU: Radeon HD 4850
RAM: 8gb
OS: Windows 7 64bit ultimate

scores:

1860 in the Hi Res

3064 in the low Res

Im annoyed that those were the only two resolution options since I run at 1680×1050.

Joe - June 16, 2010

Well after looking at all of these other scores, I was really expecting my setup to be disappointing, but I managed a 3784 with a Q6600 @ 3.0, 4Gb, GTX 280 OCX on W7 64. I can’t complain.

gankatron - June 16, 2010

2751 hi-res

Elspath - June 17, 2010

I got a 2050 – 2068 Ran it a few times with different desktop settings and sometimes a message or a background cycle would lower my score but im happy ^_^ That was with high res.

I have windows 7, 4 gigs, 2.6 duel core and a gforce 260 card

Xenovore - June 17, 2010

Since the benchmark is heavy on particle effects and polys, most people’s systems will be fill-limited, i.e. the video card cannot keep up. Upgrading will make a huge difference. I got a measly 720 at 1920×1080 with my old 8800GTS, but friends with faster/newer cards were easily getting into the upper 2000s and above. (Same/similar CPU.)

And certainly the benchmark has to represent the game’s highest settings, which I’m sure can be lowered considerably in the actual game.

But as pretty as it looks, I’m more concerned that the game-play and UI will be the usual suckage, so my over-all feeling matches Keen’s… Meh. =\

Lowtec - June 17, 2010

Could it be that all you guys with scores below 2000 have ATI graphics cards? Combined with the NVidia logo on the benchmark it shows the same flaw that all gaming benchmarks I’ve seen in the last years seems to have. They won’t judge all graphics cards the same.

I noticed it first when running 3DMark 2003 IIRC. Since then I lost faith in those type of benchmarks.

SteelmachineT - June 17, 2010

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition 3.2GHz
GPU: Nvidia GTX 260 216
RAM: 4gb DDR3
OS: Windows 7 64bit

scores:

Hi Res = 2378

Low Res = 3944

Guys the chart from Square Enix is crap. Ignore it. Run fraps while running the benchmark and watch your fraterate. Does your fps drop below 30fps ? If not you are good to go and will have a smooth gameplay experience. My pc has a 2 year old video card and ran the benchmark silky smooth and never dropped below 30fps and most of the time if ran the benchmark at 60+ fps.

Rindan - June 17, 2010

Guess Square plans to release a game nobody can run, its the GTA 4 of MMORPG’s.

Yarr - June 17, 2010

Not sure what that benchmark is good for, as those would be cut scenes, not game play, right?

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.00GHz
GPU: ATI HD5870 (recent replacement for dead NVIDIA 8800GTS)
RAM: 2GB DDR2 P35 motherboard (system built in April 2008)
OS: Windows XP 32bit

scores:

Hi Res = 3557
Low Res = 3578

I think that is probably all my motherboard can handle with the two scores being almost the same, so my video card should do better on a motherboard with a more recent chip set.

Danath - June 17, 2010

I crank most games at max settings and get high framerates, like ME2 and dragon age, and all my steam games… I scored a whopping 1750 on this. Ouch, really ouch. Funny part is my framerate didn’t seem too bad even though my score was apparently terrible.

Eternity - June 17, 2010

I read somewhere that lalafells look exactly like a bowling pin and they totally do lol thats all I see now when I look at them

Elspath - June 17, 2010

Tarr – Its a cute scen ran pure by game engin not movie.

Just so if no one mentioned it yet but the benchmark dosent even use duel core systems so if your set to single or duel core you get the same score (tested it)

Eternity - June 17, 2010

Well thats good news els even i could see a lot of peoples scores going way up if the multiple cores worked. I may have a hope to try this game without buying a new computer yet!

Alice - June 17, 2010

ran the test again this time using fraps to check FPS
Score: 1475
FPS:
during wide scenes- 35
during close scenes with lots of npcs(the average scenes)- 25
during the craziest scenes with lots of particle effects- 19

Gustavef - June 17, 2010

Well this will be one game that I will pass on. Did not even get over 400 on my system. Granted it is 2 year old laptop, but it plays other games right now quite well. So the fact that it isn’t even playable on this level of system makes me think they are going to do poorly with the high barrier of entry.

Tauren Warlock - June 17, 2010

An amazing 555 with my little laptop.

It is a very pretty slide show. I’d like to see it animated some time.

I like that square released this. It’s nice to see what I’m getting into before I run out and buy the $50 box. In this case it’s all in engine and not the pre-rendered cinematics everyone else likes to show.

Sure it’s a machine breaker now but with Moore’s law it will get easier to run over time. If this pushes off adoption for some users for 6 months or a year it could be a good thing. It’ll give the game more of Eve’s slow burn instead of War’s boom and bust.

Zaeni - June 18, 2010

Keen, post your specs please.

A benchmark by its very nature is supposed to stress the machine it’s on. It is not indicative of the gameplay, nor the actual performance in-game, which may vary given additional setting to play with.

At least SE releases a benchmark. I would love to have had a benchmark for Age of Conan. Or the upcoming Tera online. And SWTOR.

Ruchui - June 18, 2010

Cant get my head around some of the postings on here! Trying to work out if people are having a laugh or … ? Your surprised it wont play on a 2 year old laptop? Calling your mid ’08 machine semi-new (its not *~anything-new*)?!

The game hasnt been released yet and is designed to last many years, dont be shocked if your machine which you wrongly described as once decent needs an upgrade.

Take a look at Yarr’s setup, nothing new or special in there apart from the GPU and they are getting 3500+ on high, if your scoring lower than that – why not take a moment to think about this ^

@GreenArmadillo – you said you replaced ur gpu recently, a 9600 GSO, which was literally a re-badged 8800 GS – so Im hoping your not that disappointed that 3 year old tech isnt doing so well on this bench.

@Alice – the HD 4650 wasnt a gaming card when it was hot on the shelves, nearly 2 years ago…

If your machine was genuinely middle-of-the-road last year it’ll play this game. If it was very good 2 years ago it’ll play this game. If its 3 years old and scoring poorly… times have moved on and you havent (to be clear, 3 year old tech, doesnt matter if you bought it ‘recently’, if it was old before you bought it…!). It doesnt matter that it plays low demanding half decade old mmo’s (which one would I be talking about? :p). In half a decades time Im sure the netbooks sellotaped to the side of cereal boxes will run FFXIV… and?

Keen
Keen - June 18, 2010

Vista 32
Q6600 2.4ghz (Quadcore)
4gigs ram
Nvidia 8800gt 512mb

I know that my system is over 2 years old. However, I also know (since I play on this thing every day) that I can run any game out there without any performance issues. To score so low that the benchmark tells me I really can’t run the game is concerning.

Gustavef - June 18, 2010

@Ruchui: The game is coming out this year, and the total inability to run on hardware that is only two years old is a very bad sign. And my laptop isn’t no slouch.

Vista 32
4GM memory
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5GHz
Nvidia Geforce 8600 GT

I play recently release games at near high quality and have very little problem.

I would have at least expected to get 1500 – 1999 range.

Demanding hardware that is less than years old is just a plain bad idea. If a 500 $US system today can not play this game then they developers might as well just expect to have low number of players. Which is a bit of a shame for such a well known franchise.

Ruchui - June 18, 2010

@gustavef – While I wouldnt call your laptop slouch (<– im assuming that means gimpy/crappy?), I wouldnt be keen to play brand new titles on it either. And just because the date on the game is 2010 (thats if it doesnt get delayed), the fact its end of year does mean a full year has passed, its as good as a 2011 title.

The game scored in the 'high performance' bracket on my machine, which is 9 months old and I built myself for under 1 and a half grand (which incls. OS/BR-W/nice seperate sound card etc in that figure), a far cry from a real enthusiasts budget. And Ive now just tested it out on my *old* side rig (E8400 / HD 4870 / 2GB / XP) it scored 2167 on high res and ran smooth, a machine which you could probably throw together for close to ur $500 mark 😉

winryese - June 18, 2010

Radeon 4870X2 here with 8GB RAM and e8500 dual core. 1506 score on high. I gotta be hoping its a ATI slight thing

NinjaDante - June 19, 2010

I got a 4792 on High
Windows 7 -64bit
i7-920 overclocked to 3.4ghz
ati 4970 video card
6GB of RAM

Luke - June 19, 2010

AMD Phenom 9500 Quad-Core 2.1GHz
2GB RAM
GeForce 9500 GT
1GB Video RAM

not a new machine, but plays everything i throw at it on the highest setting. the ffxiv benchmark gave me 848. seriously? what video card should i get? i already planned on upgrading my RAM situation, and the quadcore should be just fine too right? any suggestion would be much appreciated.

FR83 - June 20, 2010

This benchmark is either completely fubar or my system is fubar. Im on an AMD Phenom 9500 2.2Ghz, 4gig ram, and a GeForce GTS 250. Whats so puzzling to me is my scores don’t resemble anyone else in a diffrent sense. As i see it, most scores there is a 1000+ point gap between hi-res and low-res. For my low-res scores, I’m averaging between 1950-2010. On my hi-res, I’m averaging 1870-1920. Does that make sense? Why are these scores so close together? If that doesn’t make sense, then the test where my hi-res score was HIGHER than the low-res score really doesn’t make sense. It’s obvious something is wrong with the benchmark. My scores should be gapped atleast relatively close to everyone elses and they arent

Ruchui - June 20, 2010

Well from looking around at various forums there are a couple of things which have become clear. The first being this bench doesnt use more than 1 cpu or 1 gpu (in fact if u have more than 1 gpu – u may find turning off sli/xfire can increase ur score), not all that unusual for something in Alpha stage. The second being that this bench really enjoys higher clocks, so many of you with low clocked quad-cores will be seeing disappointing results.

Anyone in this situation will find that by the time the end product is launched, they will see an increase in performance without altering their machine.

@FR83 – its an odd result, id be guessing its because you have reached a bottleneck.

Yarr - June 20, 2010

@FR83 – like Ruchui said, similar scores on benchmarks at different resolutions often mean there is something limiting the system. In my case (almost identical scores on high and low) it is the motherboard and RAM most likely, my video card is overkill for what it can deal with. Granted, I could easily overclock the system to squeeze out some more performance, but I can run everything just fine as is, so I’m not going to do that just for a benchmark of a game I’m very unlikely to play.

Of course the usual suspects should always be checked when running benchmarks: defrag the hard drive, make sure drivers are up to date and there are no conflicts, turn off background processes you don’t normally run while gaming, etc. If you try a lot of demos or have recently installed older games, go through the OS settings and make sure they are set at what they should be. I’ve have older games mess with Window’s settings and one even replaced some DirectX files it shouldn’t have, but reinstalling the latest version for XP fixed that.

Brazin - June 21, 2010

I just recently bought my computer about maybe 3-4 months ago (in technology time, thats recent imo 🙂 ) and anyways well i scored less than 300. I play alot of games fine but looking at all of these comments, im gonna kind of scared and surprised at the same time on how higher other people have gotten.

This computer should be able to come out with a much better score than 300< i mean really? Can anyone give me advice or a tip/idea on why my score was so low? I'll post what i think is important on the specs and whatnot 🙂

Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600)
Processor: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU E3300 @ 2.50GHz (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
Memory: 3072MB RAM
Page file: 991MB used, 5149MB available
Direct Version: DirectX 11
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS (Approx. Total Memory: 1779 MB)

FFXIV benchmark | WeDuggIt - June 22, 2010

[…] benchmark Posted on Tuesday June, 22 2010 | 0 Comments Keen is a bit disappointed by his low score of 1307 on the official FFXIV benchmark. My computer is only slightly better, at […]

Benchpark - June 22, 2010

i remember using my old crap computer to try and run FFXI, teh benchmark was laggy as shit, but when the actuall game came around it ran smooth as butter, dont take this stupid buggy benchmark seriously

Brazin - June 22, 2010

hmm, so you guys are saying i shouldnt worry about it as much and that when the game comes out i’ll probably be able to play it fine?

Ruchui - June 22, 2010

Ive been biting my tongue questioning whether to reply or not – I really dont want to be mean or nasty, but Brazin ur making that difficult to do :-p

@Brazin – Your machine is really really old, the fact you bought it a few months ago means nothing. A Celeron is the trademark of the cheapest-of-the-cheap, its got next to no cache, its got a *severely* bottlenecked front side bus. The nV 8 series is old and you got i think the very bottom one. If you want a tip from me, it would be that the purchaser of that machine goes to the nearest police station and reports a sexual violation against them.

That may seem like Im being deliberately insulting, but thats as reserved as I could possibly be commenting on that. A genuine tip for you is that you bring someone who knows anything at all about computers next time you buy.

As I said before, a middle-of-the-road gamer pc last year will run this game fine and a very good pc from 2 years ago will run this fine.

NinjaDante’s pc is a great example of this, both the cpu (i7-920, so old at this point its been replaced) & the gpu (I think he meant a 4870, so old you cant even buy 1 anymore – where im from at least) will be over 2 years old when this game hits, neither of them were the most expensive you could buy and he got a stones throw from a 5k result.

Senkyo - June 22, 2010

I got score of 700 something on low.

Windows 7 -64 bit
Intel Core i5-430M 2.26GHz Turbo Boost 2.53GHz
NVidia GT325M 1GB DDR3 VRAM (read below)
4GB of DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM

Unfortunately, it only wants to read my Integrated Graphics card. Which I think is the reason for my low score. I can’t seem to get it to read my GT325…

Brazin - June 22, 2010

Ruichui, thx for the tips 🙂 the comp was about 399 bucks so i wasnt expecting much but what do you recommend me do? should i buy a new video card or something? I want to play this game and buying a new computer isnt going to be possible just yet so is there any little thing that i could replace that will allow me to play this game?

I dont know jack shitt about computers so i didnt thing the processor or w/e was bad lol but i’ll keep that in mind one day when i buy a new computer. But as for right now what do you think i should do ?

Brazin - June 22, 2010

ohh and would it be at all possible to replace the processor with somehting better? just wondering

Ruchui - June 22, 2010

Your options are probably not good Brazin :/ You would need to see what PSU is in the machine, its likely that it only has enough juice to power the parts it came with – meaning you wouldnt want to buy a new cpu or gpu without buying a new psu.

If you can tell me what the psu is and the model of motherboard I might be able to suggest something. (Power/brand should be on the side of the psu and you can download ‘cpu-z’ to tell u the mobo model if you dont know)

Brazin - June 22, 2010

the motherboard is small and red lol it says “MSI” everywhere it looks like a logo and the power supply im guessing is where my power cord plugs into, that has a sticker with a bunch of info but it says

SOLY TECH: ATX 250W switching power supply

Drakul - June 22, 2010

Ran it on high res.

3713

Win7 64; 2.67 i7; 8G Mem; 5900 card; SB X-Fi; OCZ Agility 60G;

I do have my desktop res at 5760×1080 so the test ran windowed. Not sure if that made a difference.

Ruchui - June 22, 2010

Oh dear :/ Thats just as I thought, only enough to run the parts it came with and not a fraction more. I wouldnt recommend you put any new cpu/gpu in that machine – as is.

So basically, you can buy a new psu (450W+ minimum) and a new gpu (something like a HD 57×0 which will set you back a little over a $100 for the gpu), which would make the game playable. It still wouldnt be great tho and your opening up a can of worms then with – do u also get a new cpu… because you are stuck with a socket 775 chip (pretty old) and theres a chance that the motherboard only supports an 800 fsb (most chips are greater, so putting a higher chip on the board wouldnt help much since the motherboard will hold it back anyway), so then do u replace the motherboard too? Then you’d need new ram……. *can of worms* !

I dont think even tho the bench tool isnt very well optimised and the end product will run better than most expect, that its going to help you – a triple digit score is bad news.

My advice is to sell your machine when the game launches and buy a new one, it’ll cost a little more than just a new psu + gpu, but u will have a much much nicer pc 🙂

Kyosei - June 23, 2010

This kind of reminds of the time when Final Fantasy XI came out. Shame shame. I thought they would’ve learned from the last time that the average household does not own super computers.

Lannstar - June 23, 2010

Senkyo I think I have the same problem as you, your specs are nearly identical to mine:

Windows 7 -64 bit
Intel Core i5-450M 2.40GHz Turbo Boost 2.66GHz
NVidia GT105M 512Mb DDR3 VRAM (read below)
4GB of DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM

Mine is the new Samsung Q430… I was hoping for a little better than a 609 score. I’ll keep checking here in case one of us finds a cure for our issue.

Lannstar - June 23, 2010

Edit: I have an NVidia GT310M 512Mb DDR3… not a 105 dunno how I messed that up.

Shiestykat - June 23, 2010

I’m getting this on the PS3 so none of this concerns me lol!

Seriously though; I remember when FFXI came out it had the
same ridiculous requirements. It’s the first MMO to truly incorporate current gen graphics. What do you expect? If you want true high end graphics on PC you gotta shell out for it. For example: my friend bought a Dell Alien-ware PC specifically for this game. On high rez he scored almost 7k. That PC cost him over $2000. That’s what you should be expecting to spend to play this game at a higher end on PC. Otherwise go buy the PS3 version. It’ll look just as pretty and cost a whole lot less.

Lannstar - June 24, 2010

Yea, but it’d be nice to farm while I’m in between classes on my laptop!

Senkyo - June 24, 2010

Lannstar, I was looking at some other forums and it looks like we just have to wait for our drivers to get a new update. The most current one for our cards was released 6/15, but it didn’t fix this problem. Optimus technology is nice, but it has its own problems lol xD

lol - June 26, 2010

Might just be a better option to start a new game in FFXI for those of you on older models. Think about it. FFXIV will have just come out. Remember when FFXI launched? Yeah, it was pretty goddamn awful, and I’m expecting something of the same here.

Paladin - July 6, 2010

Two words for you folks, graphics card. No matter how fast your processor is I know this first hand from the most graphic intense game of all time flight simulator X. That would bring any computer in production today to it’s knees if u cared to do so. Trust me. 150 bucks will solve u problem

Marius - July 9, 2010

just ran the benchmark and got a 5821, the CPU load hovered around 18%, and the RAM load never exceeded 2.73 Gb, as with all games currently, they run in 32 bit mode, which is sad as it means it can’t take advantage of more then 4 Gb of ram.

Win 7 Pro 64 bit OS
I7 930, clocked @ 3.2 GHz (quad core)
ATI 5970 2 Gb VRAM, clocked @ 775(gpus)/1100(mem) MHz
P6x58D Asus MB
12 Gb DDR3 1600 Mhz RAM

Scatterbrain - July 17, 2010

CPU: Pentium D 950, 3.40GHz, 4M cache, 800MHz FSB
RAM: 2.0GB DDR
GPU: Sapphire 100228L, Radeon HD3850 AGP, 512MB GDDR2, 526 Bit, 4X/8X HDCP
HD: Western Digital, Raptor 1500ADFD
MB: Intel D865GSA
PSU: 650W Cooler Master RP-650-PCAR
Display: 21″ CRT, ViewSonic P810
OS: Windows XP PRO

Scores
High: 1118/48508MS
Low: 1353/33760MS

Scores With Fraps
High: 1108 with 12-37fps
Low: 1350 with18-30fps

Plans for this PC, Maybe run Win 7 64 and update display. I will try to run the game on this current system. It is what it is.

lindz - July 21, 2010

Not just a good graphics card will help, but making sure you have a PSU that can properly support it. I’m having troubles right now because my psu is just on the edge of being not powerful enough for my gfx card so I’ll need to update it before release.

Marius - July 21, 2010

That is true Iindiz, my advice is to buy big, I use a 1200 watt modular PSU. A good PSU last you years, so why buy small and have to replace it every 2 years? Besides big is often quiet, most PSU are quiet until they reach the half capacity load, whispering along at around 20-25 dB, after that noise polution goes up at a 45 degree angle until it reaches the 95 percentile and is often at around 50+ dB.

Carlos - July 21, 2010

Just ran the benchmark and got a score of 4755. Have a fairly new computer made it about 6 months ago.

Intel i7 2.8ghz
6gb RAM
1 TB of HD Space
GeForce GTX 285 OC+

Benny - July 22, 2010

I ran it but am pretty disappointed…
High: 3030
Low: 3760

My computer specs which I thought was decent…
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.0ghz
RAM: 4GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 1280MB
OS: Windows 7 64-bit

Anyone know what might be causing such low scores? I thought upgrading to a GTX 470 would have pushed my high to at least above 4000s.

Scatterbrain - July 30, 2010

CPU: Core 2 Duo E8500, LGA775, 3.16GHz, 6M L2 Cache, 1333MHz FSB, 45nm
RAM: 4.0GB DDR2, 1066MHz, PC2-8500 C5
GPU: (2 Way SLI) EVGA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Super Clocked, PCI-E 2.0, 896MB GDDR3, DirectX 10
HD: Western Digital, Raptor 1500ADFD
MB: Asus P5N-D
PSU: 950W Corsair, CMPSU-950TX, 80 Plus Silver
Display: 21″ CRT, ViewSonic P810, @ 1600 x 1200 Resolution
OS: Windows 7, 64 Bit, Home

Scores
High: 2396/12382ms
High: 2399/12261ms
Low: 3360/13621ms
Low: 3283/12332ms

Scores With Fraps
High: 2407/12451ms with 26-65fps
Low: 3270/12348ms with 44-80fps

Please see previous post #65. I did some $900 in upgrading including case. Pretty much a new PC. The processor was given to me by a friend. I just got the machine running and have not really tweaked anything yet. Win 7, 64 Bit, and SLI are new to me.

Radda - August 1, 2010

Just ran the bench. Definitly disappointed.

Low Res: 1120-1250

AMD Athlon II X4 630 Processor 2.80 GHz
4.0 GB RAM DDR2
Win 7 64-bit
GT 220 graphics card

any suggestions on getting my score up? I thought I had a decent set up but… Is this simply a graphics upgrade that I need? Thx

Keen
Keen - August 1, 2010

This benchmark is a complete farce btw.

Game will run much better than it states.

Scatterbrain - August 7, 2010

Hey Keen regarding your post #72 I hope you are right. That’s what others are saying. At least I have a better machine because of all this. And just maybe my older Pentium D machine might run this. See post #65 for those specs.

CPU: Core 2 Duo E8500, LGA775, 3.16GHz, 6M L2 Cache, 1333MHz FSB, 45nm
RAM: 4.0GB DDR2, 1066MHz, PC2-8500 C5
GPU: (2 Way SLI) EVGA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Super Clocked, PCI-E 2.0, 896MB GDDR3, DirectX 10
HD: Western Digital, Raptor 1500ADFD
MB: Asus P5N-D
PSU: 950W Corsair, CMPSU-950TX, 80 Plus Silver
Display: 21″ CRT, ViewSonic P810, @ 1600 x 1200 Resolution
OS: Windows 7, 64 Bit, Home

Please see previous post #65 and #70.

I played a bit with the Asus tuning software and the Nvidia tuner. I added 2GB of RAM and here are my scores.

High 2402/22306ms
High 2407/12465ms
Low 3274/12429ms
Low 3268/12675ms

Shit, I just found out I had SLI off. I just learned to turn it on ><

High 2443/12990ms
High 2449/12758ms
Low 3200/13151ms
Low 3191/12840ms

The High scores improved and the Low scores suck.

I downloaded the latest EVGA drivers and got these scores

High 3077/12357ms
High 3059/12516ms
Low 3364/12791ms
Low 3374/124091ms

Asus has a Turbo mode so I turned it on and got these scores

High 3010/26230ms
High 2987/12635ms
Low 3271/12758ms
Low 3270/12594ms

So Turbo Mode sucks. Switched back to Auto Mode FTW

Anonymous - August 15, 2010

I am in the beta. And let me tell you… the cutscene is not the intensive part of the game. If you are scoring even in the 4000s, your PC will hit below 20 fps during crowded areas of more than 10 people without AA running in 720p. This game makes Crysis cry. SE has gone and made themselves the next graphics benchmark, for sure…

Luke - August 16, 2010

hey anon #74 what spec is your pc and how does yours fare in the relation to others i am just curious and you have to remember the beta is a tester with all the bugs and not a true reflection of the actual game

sirsmithy - September 10, 2010

i got 4000 and 31700 load time
seems ok

fernando - September 12, 2010

Hey I just bought a 3k dollar laptop for this game and by reading these post doesn’t seem like its gonna fair well. Lol its still in production. M15x alienware. I7 quad core 1,8 ghz 3.2 ghz turbo mode 6 gb of ram and nvidia gtx 260 m… What do you guys think?

firemagnet - September 20, 2010

urgh…. i have a less-than-a-year old laptop from toshiba, with a 2.26 dual core intel i3 processor, 4 gigs ddr3 ram, windows 7 and a 512 megabyte Nvidia 310M graphics processor….and i get a freaking 500? holy crud….. they have to have lower resolutions than that!

Aqua - September 23, 2010

Mine is CRAP!!!!!
My laptop (new) scored 248 and my PC, newly buil from scratch scored 1700 ¬_¬ fail all around

Stroagjh - August 1, 2012

An individual read this right- in environment. how do i unlock iphone 4 When it�s creation, Capoeira became everyone around you that it usually is utilized simply by anybody, no matter measurements, bodyweight, or maybe time. The model is a bit more over a martial art style, but in addition any sociable occurrence that may be loaded in tradition as well as heritage. Capoeira is often a almighty martial art form, similar to a alliance with popular music, dancing, and amazing movements ( blank ) and even a activity.
Look At This Theme iphone 4 how to unlock
unlock imei iphone 4 iphone 4 how to unlock
Many Techniques to http://unlockiphone4zzz.info !

Comments are closed