FPS COMPARISON 1.02.14821 vs 1.03.15527 @ 09-08-2011

baronWastelan · #1 09-09-2011, 03:07 AM

Thanks for posting this, I have a very similar system. I now see the benefit of my upgrading to a Q9650 and OC to 3600mhz! I'm getting 31fps avg @ 1920x1200 with the new beta. Also GTX 570, stock clocks.

SPUDLEY1977 · #2 09-09-2011, 03:25 AM

baron, you're welcome. However watching CPU and GPU utilization it seems the GPU may be approaching more of a limiting factor, not because it is fully utilized but it appears more % utilized vs the CPU's. Based on Utilization of both it FEELS like it has a bit more to do with the way the code is written like it needs some optimizations, and how data/textures are culled from the HD/ RAM/etc . I fly on the RAVENS Nest so if you are there give me a shout before you send me your BB's.

baronWastelan · #3 09-09-2011, 03:47 AM

How's your memory bandwidth? That should be a factor in GPU utilization. I benchmark mine with this free utility:

MaxxMEM² - PreView

I have 4Gig DDR3 @ 1600mhz

Icebear · #4 09-09-2011, 06:18 AM

Very interesting evaluations ! Thank you very much.

@SPUDLEY1977

Wich software did you use ? Have you also compared the VRAM workload ?

SPUDLEY1977 · #5 09-09-2011, 09:41 AM

Icedbeer, You're welcome sir always a pleasure to help when appreciated. I did not do the VRAM as it is a bit of a pain in the dierrerrierrerre.

The software used was MSI Afterburner to record the datapoints - kudos to MSI for providing such an excellent piece of software - none compare. I used Excel to arrange and graph the datapoints for your visual pleasure.

Icebear · #6 09-09-2011, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUDLEY1977

Icedbeer, You're welcome sir always a pleasure to help when appreciated. I did not do the VRAM as it is a bit of a pain in the dierrerrierrerre.

The software used was MSI Afterburner to record the datapoints - kudos to MSI for providing such an excellent piece of software - none compare. I used Excel to arrange and graph the datapoints for your visual pleasure.

Too bad as IMO the stutters many people suffer could also be caused by excessive VRAM workload or deficient VRAM cache management. But a pain in the dierrerrierrerre is even more worse.....

SPUDLEY1977 · #7 09-09-2011, 12:13 PM

Ice,
I have been shopping for an SSD 64GB Crucial M4, as the latest SSD technology is not quite ready for prime time as our HD technology is. Once I locate one at the correct price point I will get one.

SPUDLEY1977 · #8 09-09-2011, 09:47 AM

Baron von Pizza (I'm hungary), I am not familiar with that, what specificially is it supposed to test, memory bandwith? and which one as there are several memory bandwith potential bottlenecks on a PC....Mobo<>CPU, MOBO >< GPU, RAM bandwidth, and like others that I am not versed in.

Damn Im hungry and it is 1600 hours Fri AM and I cannot sleep so Im browsing,.... make mine extra sauce, pepperoni, veggies, and Jalapenos please.

baronWastelan · #9 09-09-2011, 10:13 AM

The test utility runs on your CPU to calculate the maximum theoretical throughput of your system RAM. The results are determined by your memory sub-system hardware and how it is configured. It does not test graphics card. Bigger numbers are better for bandwidth, smaller number is better for latency. I provided my results so you can compare yours since you have a similar system, i.e. LGA775 socket quad-core processor and 4 GB RAM.

SPUDLEY1977 · #10 09-09-2011, 10:47 AM

Baroni,
Thanks but I am all tested out, don't have the software and do not feel the need to this test aspect. I was only providing info for others to assismilate and use for good purpose.