Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Edited by Black gold saw., 22 March 2012 - 02:31 PM.
My crysis benchmark.
Started by
Guest_Black gold saw._*
, Mar 22 2012 02:30 PM
11 replies to this topic
#2
DanTheGamer11
-
- Members
-
- 3162 posts
Screw This S**t
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 22 March 2012 - 02:44 PM
Silky smooth 
Did you try 64bit?
Did you try 64bit?
Next time ya close my Survarium thread don't be a hypocrite and make a thread under the same conditions
#3
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 March 2012 - 02:48 PM
Silky smooth
64-bit makes FPS drop by about 1/3rd..
#4
MJCRO
-
- Members
-
- 1749 posts
_____
- Gender:Male
- Location:Mamaroneck, N.Y.
Posted 22 March 2012 - 02:51 PM
Guess those days of "but will it run Crysis?" are over. 
MJCRO
Sager NP6110
| Custom Prema BIOS v1.4|
| i7 3160QM @ 3.3Ghz |
| 8GB 1600MHz RAM @ 1866 9-11-10-27 1T 1.5v |
| GK107 2GB GT 650M [1085/1200/2150 @ 1.1v] @ 22'' 1080p |
| Corsair Force GS 180GB SSD |
| Corsair SP2500 2.1 |
#5
Stonerboy779
-
- Donated T5
-
- 5049 posts
Puts on Q701s d-_-b
- Gender:Male
- Location:Melbourne, Australia
Posted 22 March 2012 - 03:02 PM
But will it run Morrowind with 2011 Overhaul mod with maxed settings at over 10fps?Guess those days of "but will it run Crysis?" are over.
Man these spammers are geniuses...put (NO SPAM) in the thread title to hide the spam. It's brilliant. Hopefully this doesn't catch on...what if rapists wear signs that say (NOT A RAPIST)? They will be raping everybody! D:
#6
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 March 2012 - 03:05 PM
Metro 2033 is still the most demanding.
GTX 680 SLI will get it's butt handed to it @ 2560X1600 maxed..
GTX 680 SLI will get it's butt handed to it @ 2560X1600 maxed..
#7
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2012 - 12:29 PM
Here is my new result. Same in-game settings as the OP. However iv'e sinced changed to a newer (And better) driver. and a slightly higher memory clock.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
#8
Knight_72
-
- Members
-
- 4045 posts
Total Nerd
- Gender:Male
- Location:South Africa
Posted 31 March 2012 - 01:45 AM
Only 1650x1050 ? No 1920x1080 ?
Also Known as Nyt Ryda and Midnight Rider
"It's only overpriced if you can't afford it"
"Arbeit Macht Frei"
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"
#9
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
Posted 31 March 2012 - 01:53 AM
i dint need 1080p.
#10
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
#11
Rofltroll
-
- Members
-
- 439 posts
Kowalski! Options!
- Gender:Male
- Location:Romania
Posted 18 April 2012 - 11:59 PM
I've done some benchmarks and if you go from 8x to 4x you can go for 1080p and will have no fps loss.
mobo: Gigabyte X58 UD3R.
CPU: i7 920 @ 3.4 GHz 1.2v. == Chilled by Titan Fenrir Evo ==
video: Inno3D nVidia GTX 470 @ 775/1550/1775.
RAM: OCZ Gold 2x2GB @ 1440 CL7 1.65v.
HDD: Cheap-O HDD.
PSU: Corsair 650TX.
case: NZXT Hades.
#12
Guest_Black gold saw._*
Guest_Black gold saw._*
-
- Guests
Posted 19 April 2012 - 12:20 AM
Using the same settings on my 47" 1080P LCD I get 66 average and like 48-50 minimum..
The main reason i got this card was for it's 3GB of buffer.
The main reason i got this card was for it's 3GB of buffer.
