Deus Ex: Human Revolution Performance Analysis

[senvae]

I assume that the Core i7 2600K must wield similar or better results than the Core i5 at 4ghz? I have an i7 with 4.1ghz OC, and a pair of N460 hawk from MSI, with 1920x1200 resolution. From these benchmarks, it seems to indicate that I will be able to play this game on ridiculously high settings.

 

[verbalizer]

I assume that the Core i7 2600K must wield similar or better results than the Core i5 at 4ghz? I have an i7 with 4.1ghz OC, and a pair of N460 hawk from MSI, with 1920x1200 resolution. From these benchmarks, it seems to indicate that I will be able to play this game on ridiculously high settings.

from configuration says you have something else and not a i7 with SLI N460 Hawk's....
but what you have listed ain't all that bad..

senvae's configuration:
AMD Phenom 2 955BE 3.2ghz
Asus M4N82 mobo
8gig Corsair XMS2
2x GTX280 (SLI)
Auzen Prelude 7.1 X-FI
Ultra x3 1000watts
Thermaltake Spedo Advance (case)

no reason to lie, just say what you want or building..

 

[Maximus_Delta]

I think quite a few narrow minded retards on this thread going on about BF3 (give it a f***ing rest already) and Dues Ex being "lame" with "dated graphics". It's good a dev finally makes an intelligent game, with some depth and thought provoking material, and I'm sure most don't care that you can't appreciate it. Good article Toms.

 

[flclkun]

why no gtx 560 ti?

oh well i think its safe to say it will do well.

 

[alidan]

hay toms. there are still allot of people still gaming on dx9.
i personally don't care about having the prettiest graphics, so i chose to stick with xp due to my disdain for windows 7, but thats another post.

would love to see benchmarks for the highest end dx 9 settings.

also, is there a way to turn off the motion blur, i wont pick up games that have it as it gives me bad headaches after a short while of playing.

 

[Gman450]

i believe some people agree to that as well when i read discussion from other forum. to me the games graphic looks a bit dated from the trailers (showing the gameplay) but i convinced myself it could be better in the final product plus you can't make accurate judgment from trailers alone. you need to see the game on your own screen to know how it really looks like 😛. leaving the graphic things aside it was the gameplay that attracts me to this game

I've played quite a few games with the main character being able to cover in on other objects etc. It seems more like a 007 game ( Blood Stone ), but I could be wrong.

 

[farrow099]

I just started this title, great game so far. Very reminiscent of the original game. Which, imho, was reminiscent of System Shock 2 😉.

As for the graphics...
I didn't even think the new AA methods were actually activating because they are so ineffective! They seem to blur everything except the jagged edges! Maybe nvidia and ati\amd should just start shipping branded Vaseline as a new anti aliasing method!

I'm not sure if it's the lighting\shadows or the character models, but the graphics seem to be on par with a 2007 title. The tessellation feature of DX11 is clearly wasted here. As I recall, the original game used the Unreal engine. I think they would have been better off sticking to the latest iteration of that.

The real meat of this game is the story and RPG elements, not the graphics.

 

[farrow099]

Just an aside; I found the (surround) sound and voice acting to be great. No one seems to bother mentioning sound these days!

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Just an aside; I found the (surround) sound and voice acting to be great. No one seems to bother mentioning sound these days!

Of course not. Somehow, 90% of the people today complain if the game hasn't got the greatest graphics; but once we DO get them, they start whining about "lame gameplay and story" - that's what happened with Crysis 2 DX11.

Clearly, game developers must take a better look at storyline, voice acting and gameplay. I'd still take Mass Effects over ANY game out there, because of the above-mentioned factors.

 

[verbalizer]

^+1
mass effects can be cool..

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Of course not. Somehow, 90% of the people today complain if the game hasn't got the greatest graphics; but once we DO get them, they start whining about "lame gameplay and story" - that's what happened with Crysis 2 DX11. Clearly, game developers must take a better look at storyline, voice acting and gameplay. I'd still take Mass Effects over ANY game out there, because of the above-mentioned factors.[/citation]

thankyou.

however i think that its the vocal minority that want tech demo games, the majority of people have no qualms with even 2d and bad pixlated graphics, look at minecraft and terraria as two prime examples, granted i think that minecraft could stand to have... well... more rounded edges.

 

[jbauer5]

You didn't mention the performance impact of playing the game in 3d! My 3d television isn't on the official supported list. However I have been able to enjoy the game in 3d.

The framerate impact isn't large, however 3d mode introduces a lot of mouse lag!

 

[spookyman]

So would a i7 2600k be able to run it?

 

[senvae]

from configuration says you have something else and not a i7 with SLI N460 Hawk's....
but what you have listed ain't all that bad..

senvae's configuration:
AMD Phenom 2 955BE 3.2ghz
Asus M4N82 mobo
8gig Corsair XMS2
2x GTX280 (SLI)
Auzen Prelude 7.1 X-FI
Ultra x3 1000watts
Thermaltake Spedo Advance (case)

no reason to lie, just say what you want or building..

Just because I don't prowl these forums often enough to notice I never updated my PC info, doesn't mean I'm lying. Besides, I have 2 PCs and not enough space in the Signature to even fully describe one of them.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Just because I don't prowl these forums often enough to notice I never updated my PC info, doesn't mean I'm lying. Besides, I have 2 PCs and not enough space in the Signature to even fully describe one of them.

Put it into "Member Configuration"... it fits 4 PCs, for me 😀

 

[senvae]

Put it into "Member Configuration"... it fits 4 PCs, for me 😀

You learn something new everyday.

 

[verbalizer]

if you got it, then talk about it; if not then it's all speculation on one's behalf.
that's what the moderator told me long ago..

mine has four of the six in my house...😀

 

[cwolf78]

On the test setup, the GeForce GTX 560 Ti is listed, yet it does not appear in any of the charts?

 

[Wish I Was Wealthy]

I'm using nVidea at the moment,so this'll go good.

 

[Guest]

"Easy on the GPU, demanding on the CPU?" The hell is this? Looking at the numbers Tom's Hardware got and the numbers I'm getting, it looks like the GPU makes ALL of the difference. An average of 85.5 FPS for a i5 quad on a GTX 570 @ 1280x720? Ummm...No. Phenom II x4 955 BE with Radeon HD 6870 @ 1920x1200 and my min frame rate is 90FPS.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Anonymous[/nom]...and my min frame rate is 90FPS.[/citation]

That is utterly, completely meaningless unless you're benching the game the exact same way we are.

 

[safwan]

Amazing game. I was able to play it on Geforce 9600 GT 512 MB and Dual Core 2.0 GHZ and 4GB DDR 3. I played it at 1024*768 with lowered detail level and only at few places did it stutter but majority of the game was very smooth and i loved every second of it.