Doom 3 benchmarking

RuggieBear

does this look about right?

Optimal quality from ATI display settings

1600x1200
AF x16
AA x4

Ultra
32.1 FPS second pass

Giblet

Marclar, 125 fps only makes a difference in Quake3, Doom 3's physics run at 60 "ticks" per second regardless of frame rate. 60fps solid with 120hz should look cool. There are ways to up the frames aswell though.

KdjaCL

Giblet wrote:

Marclar, 125 fps only makes a difference in Quake3, Doom 3's physics run at 60 "ticks" per second regardless of frame rate. 60fps solid with 120hz should look cool. There are ways to up the frames aswell though.

Run in developer mode to unlock the fps limit.

kdjac

Adeptus Titanicus

Sapphire 9800Pro flashed to XT
AA x4
AF x16
1024x768
High

1st: 39.9
2nd: 45

Not too bad.

<edit>
and with a little more overclocking on the 9800 to 427.5/405 ( from 411.75/364.5, perfectly stable) it got to 47.5 on the second test (from 42.6)

Matt Simis

CombatCow wrote:

1600x1200
High
1st Run = 61.0 fps
2nd Run = 74.7 fps

1600x1200
Ultra High
1st Run = 61.7 fps
2nd Run = 73.2 fps

1600x1200
Ultra High AAx4
1st Run = 39.2 fps
2nd Run = 43.3 fps

Hmm, how does the 60fps "Cap" interact with the your scores of 74fps... ??



Matt

vishal

Adeptus Titanicus wrote:

Sapphire 9800Pro flashed to XT
AA x4
AF x16
1024x768
High

1st: 39.9
2nd: 45

Not too bad.

<edit>
and with a little more overclocking on the 9800 to 427.5/405 ( from 411.75/364.5, perfectly stable) it got to 47.5 on the second test (from 42.6)

Are you getting any artifacts and is everything stable?

BKtje

There is no cap on 60fps in the timedemo. If you try it on low 640 you'll see it yourself. I got over 70 at that res/quality.

Venom

Sapphire 9600XT running latest Omega drivers

Second run = 28.9fps
1024x768-high detail
AA x2

Matt Simis

B-K-DzR wrote:

There is no cap on 60fps in the timedemo. If you try it on low 640 you'll see it yourself. I got over 70 at that res/quality.

Ahh I see.

Im getting 39fps (one run only, so +5 for second run?) on

1280x768 WideScreen, with FOV set to 105 (more onscreen to slow down FPS)
1024MB DDR@430
A64 at 2.4GHz
FX5950 at 556MHz Core, 1.01GHz Memory



Matt

Adeptus Titanicus

vishal wrote:

Are you getting any artifacts and is everything stable?

Yes, perfectly stable and no artefacts at XT speeds. Only played for a bit with the additional overclock, and it also seemed fine, but the gpu was getting mighty hot

vishal

Adeptus Titanicus wrote:

Yes, perfectly stable and no artefacts at XT speeds. Only played for a bit with the additional overclock, and it also seemed fine, but the gpu was getting mighty hot

are you using an artic cooler?

Sir Random

1600x1200, 'Ultra' game setting.
4xAA, 8xAF, drivers at 'Quality'

1st: 37.2
2nd: 44.6

Lowering the settings makes very little difference, so I reckon the cpu is the bottlekneck. It averages around 56fps in the labs and corridors, heavy action drops it to ~32fps

LastIrishMonkey

well i got the game today and tis class got too run the game at low tho little problem pooie computer but it will be fine also i noticed if u run everything low and at 640x480 the game runs like poo but if u up it too 800 x 600 its better Why ? but i aint complaining but Why ?

Thordon

Athlon 1.1ghz (non XP)
Sapphire Radeon 9600 non pro 256mb
1024mb SDRAM133

0xAA, 2xAF
High Quality
800x600

First run: 15.5fps
Second run: 26fps

Adeptus Titanicus

vishal wrote:

are you using an artic cooler?

Yeah, the Arctic VGA Silencer. This baby.

Mutant_Fruit

I think this is definately worth a shot for all ATI USERS ONLY. This Tweak gives a nice performance boost on all ATI cards. I went from 32fps to 39 fps on my 9600pro, which i believe is a 20% increase. Thats not to shabby at all.

Señor Juárez

A replacement shader. How quaint. Look worse I assume? Then again, on low end PC's it is probs very welcome.