(10-08-2010, 01:58 AM)iakoboss7 Wrote: [ -> ]actually from what we saw from the 2xx drivers series and shadow lady's results the critical thing are the drivers...
There's only so much drivers can do. Besides, I'm somewhat inclined to ignore the results from the NTSC Mild benchmark. For higher end GPU, the NTSC Harsh seems more reliable.
Quote:64.13 FPS - NVIDIA GTX 460 (1 GB, 256 bit) (OC 800/2000, Driver 258.96, GV-N460OC-1GI) - JTD
55.56 FPS - NVIDIA GTX 460 (1 GB, 256 bit) (Stock 675/1800, Driver 258.96, GV-N460OC-1GI) - JTD
51.04 FPS - ATI Radeon HD 5770 (OC 960/1425) - Air
45.71 FPS - NVIDIA GTS 250 (OC 738/1320) - ilovejedd
42.55 FPS - ATI Radeon HD 5750 (OC 850/1200) - sakraycore
41.83 FPS - ATI Radeon HD 5770 (Sapphire Vapor-X OC Edition 860/1200, Catalyst 10.8) - fbr1010
39.56 FPS - ATI Radeon HD 5750 (Sapphire OC version 710/1160, Only OC 10 MHz each) - sakraycore
38.93 FPS - NVIDIA GTS 250 (Stock 738/1100) - ilovejedd
38.32 FPS - NVIDIA 9600GT (OC 700/1080, Nvidia Beta Driver 257.15) - Shadow Lady
36.41 FPS - NVIDIA 9600GT (OC 700/1080) - Shadow Lady
31.65 FPS - NVIDIA 9600GT - Shadow Lady
23.63 FPS - NVIDIA GT 240 - ilovejedd
Specifications (stock):
Code:
GPU GP/s GT/s GB/s
9600 GT 10.4 20.8 57.6
GT 240 GDDR5 4.4 17.6 54.4
GTS 250 11.8 47.2 70.4
GTS 450 12.5 25.1 57.8
HD 5750 11.2 25.2 73.6
HD 5770 13.6 34.0 76.8
GTX 460 768 MB 16.2 37.8 86.4
GTX 460 1GB 21.6 37.8 115.2
While the above chart may not matter much in modern games, you can pretty much estimate relative performance in PCSX2 based on the above. By the looks of things, the GTS 450 will be little better than a 9600 GT and perform well below even a GTS 250.
Just though I would do a followup to all the stuff I posted way earlier. I build my new computer finally, and I've got it to run every PS2 game I've thrown at it that's compatible with no speed hacks.
Specs:
i7 875k OC to 3.85 GHz @ 1.27 vcore (prime95 testing maxed the temp at 67C after running for 12 hours)
ATI HD 5830 stock speed
Gigabyte p55-usb3 MB
2 TB WD HDD
CoolIT ALC system (really nice for a pre-built liquid cooling system. would recommend)
G skill 1333 RAM 4 GB (OC to 1600)
750w Corsair PSU 1 12v rail
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
Also, after doing QUITE a bit of testing (you might add this info to the first post), provided it's compatible, you can run ANY and I do mean ANY game at full speed with a clock speed over 3.8 GHz and a decent video card.
You try Tales of Legendia?
(10-09-2010, 09:10 AM)Rezard Wrote: [ -> ]You try Tales of Legendia?
That was actually one of the first games I tested. Yeah it runs fine, no lag whatsoever.
(10-09-2010, 10:08 PM)slap chop Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2010, 09:10 AM)Rezard Wrote: [ -> ]You try Tales of Legendia?
That was actually one of the first games I tested. Yeah it runs fine, no lag whatsoever.
what settings did you use?
D3D Hardware or D3D Software?
coz this game make me sick if i played with hardware mode (graphical problem but with full speed)
and if i change to the software mode, the graphical problem is solved but this game will run very slowly (almost under 45 FPS)
my RIG:
Q 6600 @ 3,3 Ghz
RAM 3 GB
Zotac 9800 GTX+AMP
Win7 x86
btw,
have you ever try your rig to test Valkyrie Profile Silmeria?
(10-10-2010, 12:50 AM)biosphere05 Wrote: [ -> ]and if i change to the software mode, the graphical problem is solved but this game will run very slowly (almost under 45 FPS)
my RIG:
Q 6600 @ 3,3 Ghz
Ah, but the thing is his Core i7-875K running @ 3.85 GHz is roughly equivalent to your Q6600 @ 4.5 GHz.
is this enough to play ff series?
i5-460M @2.53GHz
2GB DDR3
G310M
I don't own Valkyrie Profile so I can't test it for you. Sorry. And also I can confirm that in hardware mode that game looks bad but when I play it in software mode I still don't lag lol.
@ slap chop:
Hmmm, ToL doesn't look bad in hardware mode (for me), it's more of an issue with some things not showing up in their entirity or at all on it. The in-game menu only shows a little bit, text boxes/portraits and the "Climax" gauge doesn't show at all (which sucks, because it's at or nearly full speed in battles on Hardware). Software mode was running anywhere from 40-60fps in the first town (was like mid 30s for that scene at the town center) and usually 40-45fps in battle.
It definitely seems to do better on this version compared to the last I'd tried it on (for gameplay). Still, the opening cinematic is nearly as bad as it used to be. I'm still under 10fps on Hardware, but Software gets me a whopping 20-22fps! So, if you're still keeping 60fps at that, I guess I'm just curious what FPS you're actually achieving (without Frame Limiting) and how many SW threads you're using.
@ bioshpere05:
Are you only SW rendering on 2 threads by chance? I think mine was 2 by default, but I'm not sure if PCSX2 detects how many you have on it's own...
@ frost:
If you already have it, you may have to stick to Native resolution. You might need a few Speedhacks here or there to keep full speed, but it's nearly the best choice in mobile processors for PCSX2.
If you haven't purchased it yet, look into a better GPU. The 310M is sure to hold you back at some point, but you might find them (FF series) playable if on Native, especially FFX.