Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Is the benchmark accurate?
Calintz333
Member UncommonPosts: 1,193
The benchmark said that I can only run this game on low settings on low resolution on my PC.
I found this very surprising considering I can run games like AoC, LoTRO, Aion, on Max settings, at 35-40+ FPS. as well as offline games like The Saboteur, Empire total war, and Mirrors Edge on 45-60FPS. I was actually expecting my machine to be able to handle this game on at least Medium settings well enough.
My cousin has told me that there are people with machines who can run games like Crysis on maximum settings that are getting low scores on the Benchmark.
So how reliable is the benchmark test? Do you really need to score in the 4000's to run the game smoothly at fairly high settings?
Should I completely dismiss the notion of playing this game based on the benchmark ?
It would run me about $300 or so to upgrade my pc to where it could probably score a 4000 on the benchmark, as it stands I scored 1900-2000 in low resolution and about 900 in high resolution. My native resolution is 1680x1050 which the benchmark didn't have the option for.
I don't really want to spend $300 + 50 just to try out a new game. Especially since my mmorpg strike out record so far is 11/0 (11 games Iv treid 0 iv stuck with). So I don't think its worth my money to upgrade my pc just to perhaps play a single game. That being said I still don't even know if its absolutely needed or if the benchmark is off and I can actually run this game well on Medium settings.
That...and I'm kinda already planning to spend my year long savings on a slightly more important upgrade in my life lol...
Comments
I went from 1600 using a mid range PC to 3300 by matching the desktop resolution to the benchmark test resolution
It really is just the benchmark
I dont think any part of that benchmark is captured from actual gaming. Its all video. So yea the accuracy is probably less competent than it could be.
I'd say the same. I didn't even hit 2000, but I have a really good pc...
Windows 7 64-bit
Core i7 920 2.67ghz
12gb ddr3
2x GeForce GTX 295, 1.3gb
2x SSD HD stripped
Should be good enough to run anything really, yet I could only play FFXIV on low settings? Benchmark isn't reliable imo
Check this post http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/283831/Benchmark-Clarification-It-doest-mean-much-yet.html
2560x1600 is my montior's native resolution and is what i normally keep my deskstop at. I lowed it like you said to 1920x1080 and didn't see a difference in my score at all with the benchmark.
I have heared some people with beta experience say that the benchmark descriptions and marks are pretty accurate...
(Don't know tough if i am allowed to write that)
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
the benchmark is max settings it hink just diffreant rez
I don't know about how the benchmark worked for you guys, but it wouldn't allow me to run it fullscreen, and forced me to run it windowed at (what I assume to be) max settings. Got a score of 2200~. In my opinion, an mmo shouldn't be run in windowed mode.... where's the immersion in seeing your desktop and taskbar at the corners of your vision?? Not to mention runnign in windowed mode reduces the performance for games on a pc.
That's pretty much what I'd expect - due to the current lack of multi-GPU support, you're actually running that benchmark on approximately one GTX275 core - the other three aren't doing anything, unfortunately.
A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.
To the op,you must have by now ,realized that Square has been having a lot of problems with their coding,since utilizinbg the Crystal Tools,so i am sure we are seeign a wel lstreamlined game or benchmark.
My opinion should also be the opinion of anyone that has seen the benchmark.What should have been VERY obvious,is the lack of fighting and realistic game play animations ,firing off all over the screen.Also the benchmark video also used several scenes that were very tight and small view areas.
To be fair here to Square,by release time,it might even out,we might have a better streamlined game to offset much higher demands from actual game play.
To answer your question more direct,NO i do not find that benchmark to be accurate,what i am saying is that in a roundaout way ,it will end up being more accurate by release time,better coding but more demand from actual game play,not some cheap video,that imo did not resemble realistic game play.
Don't feel bad,i also played AOC ect ect with no problems,and only got 1300 hd and 1500 low res on the FFXIV benchmark.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I'm looking at the screenshots and I don't see what makes this game so graphically demanding. I mean, it looks good, don't get me wrong, but not that good.
I get a 3700+ score with a
core i5 750 2.67ghz
windows xp sp3
4g ram ddr3
and a HD 4890
so you guys probably have some pc problems haha mine run just fine.
I'm looking at the screenshots and I don't see what makes this game so graphically demanding. I mean, it looks good, don't get me wrong, but not that good.
Yeah but what we see is a mob here and there in pretty surroundings on the vid... Remembe in the dunes blms farming uber amounts of mons and hen ageing them in spectacular fashion? Great stuff... That's probably where things get powerful in stances where you could get mobbified and stuff... Cities too when they're uber populatedThe benchmark only really scores your video card.
I have 2 computers w/ Q6600's(quad 2.4) and 8800gts 512's but one is overclocked to 3.2 and that same one runs a SLI setup
Both computers get identical scores on low/high resolutions
What does that mean? Benchmark is not pushing the processor much if not at all and it does not take multi gpu/sli settups into account.
At the most I think people are looking at video card upgrades for this game.
And if the guy above me scored a 3700 w/ a 4890 and I got a 2400 ish w/ a 3 year old 8800gts 512 then i dont even see a current $500 card gettin the max score (8000)
So like the guy said in the link, they really tried to future proof their game and low scores now are normal.
As for me, I'm just going to wait to see how well I run it then make a descision as to what to do next.
On low rez right?
A 4890 Shouldn't get a score that high unless you have a xfire configuration going. Your CPU is only slightly better than the minimum requirements.. so i'm guessing that's your low rez score.
The reason I question your score is because my rig is very very similar to yours and my scores were not near that.
I have....
AMD Phenom II X3 710 Processor (2.6 GHz)
8 GB Kingston HyperX @ 1066
Ati Radeon 4890 (1gb)
1 Terabit Hardrive
Windows 7 (64 bit)
High Res: 2349
Low Res: 3298
I know I could use some upgrades but I find it odd my low res and high res scores are so close, I just bought the 9800 gt about 6 months ago, as it was a upgrade from the one i had.
XP SP3
Pentium D 2.66 Ghz x2
3GB Memory
ASUS P5ND2-SLI MB
9800GT 512MB
My scores:
Low: 1220
High: 1170
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
To ease the pain of some here
I scored around 800 - 1000 on low on the benchmark. I am also currently playing the beta with 15 - 25 FPS, depending if I am fighting or in a city. So in other words, yes it is still playable, you just need to live with a little bit of lag.
I highlighted the important bit.
As I pointed out in another thread, the only thing that everyone who gets a high score on this benchmark has in common is they all have ATI video cards. It doesn't really matter if they're relatively old as long as they're somewhat current, you just have to have one.
Other things give me pause as well about the benchmark, mainly how the CPU and RAM seem to be irrelevent for it. Any computer that's built to run MMOs smoothly is going to have lots of RAM, certainly more than 4 GB, at least these days. The fact that this game seems so unoptimized for a wide range of relativly common PC configurations is one of the main reasons I haven't and probably won't pre-order this game, I'm not upgrading my GTX 295 that's only a year old for one game, though my own score (2400ish, w/ an OC'd i7 940, 12GB DDR 1600 MhZ, GTX 295) seems to indicate I'll get at least acceptable performance.
The game runs really poorly on most ATI cards right now, this is a known issue and that's what the beta is for.
I honestly think everyone should just ignore the benchmark... the game client runs a lot better than the benchmark does.