Half Life 2 benchmarks (finally)
- Thread starter blackeye
- Start date
The Terminator
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 1,861
- Reaction score
- 0
sweet, this game should run just as good as regular CS. lol.
blackeye
Newbie
- Joined
- May 11, 2004
- Messages
- 1,022
- Reaction score
- 0
Its nice to see the 6800 ultra perform well. I would still much rather have the x800 xt but the 6800 ultra did great in doom 3 and it seems to be doing better then most people expected in cs source. I dont know if this is an indication of how well half life 2 will run though.
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
This would be classified as a useless benchmark. If HL2 looks anything like CS:S, I will be extremely disappointed. I fully expect HL2 will be more graphically demanding than the CS:S test we have.
Though I would like to see how other cards perform to make sure I'm not crazy. But when you can run at 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF and have an average framerate above 60, I can see why most computers are not having a problem running the CS:S test.
Though I would like to see how other cards perform to make sure I'm not crazy. But when you can run at 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF and have an average framerate above 60, I can see why most computers are not having a problem running the CS:S test.
A
AzzMan
Guest
Yeah I think it's safe to say it'll run a lot differently on their computer than on my 3000+ xp 512mb ram and 9800pro......
Darkknighttt
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 1,176
- Reaction score
- 0
looks good.
Asus
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2003
- Messages
- 10,346
- Reaction score
- 0
He does all the time. He is much more objective and helpful than just about anyone else, I'd say.blackeye said:
I'd say this is pretty simple. It means that all the high end cards will have no issues with CS Source. I'd like to see a review with most of the cards bottom to top included. Probably see a DigitLife review soon.
It doesn't give you any percents or scores toward HL2 but it does tell you something we have already known. ATI does better in DX9 than Nvidia with Source as no exception. It won't be an issue with the high end cards but we will probably see a difference worth noticing in HL2, shall wait and see.
/me pats blahblahblah on the back for a job well done for his X800Pro
Now just turn on Temporal AA and smoke my card.
/me cries in the corner lol
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
/me barks like a dog. 
I just don't think that CS:S is a good benchmark to run. These benchmarks don't tell us anything useful about HL2 or the X800/6800 series.
1) Valve is using very little pixel shading for CS:S.
2) These new high end cards have more than enough fill rate power to make anybody happy.
3) The 6800's memory problems become apparent at 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF.
4) There is no statistical difference in performance with any of the high end cards (save the 6800) until 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF.
5) Either there is a frame rate cap with CS:S or it is CPU bound.
It would be more meaningful if there was a performance disparity between the cards or they benched a wider variety of cards. This benchmark does not tell the owners of older cards anything about the preformance of CS:S. You normally can extrapolate performance numbers from benchmarks for most cards even if it isn't benched. You can't do that with these benchmarks.
I wonder what 12 AA (temporal AA) and 16 AF looks like on my card.
I just don't think that CS:S is a good benchmark to run. These benchmarks don't tell us anything useful about HL2 or the X800/6800 series.
1) Valve is using very little pixel shading for CS:S.
2) These new high end cards have more than enough fill rate power to make anybody happy.
3) The 6800's memory problems become apparent at 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF.
4) There is no statistical difference in performance with any of the high end cards (save the 6800) until 1600 by 1200 with 4AA and 8AF.
5) Either there is a frame rate cap with CS:S or it is CPU bound.
It would be more meaningful if there was a performance disparity between the cards or they benched a wider variety of cards. This benchmark does not tell the owners of older cards anything about the preformance of CS:S. You normally can extrapolate performance numbers from benchmarks for most cards even if it isn't benched. You can't do that with these benchmarks.
I wonder what 12 AA (temporal AA) and 16 AF looks like on my card.
