Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim: PC Performance, Benchmarked

[cleeve]

You should have shown how CF and SLI perform. I can tell you CF doesn't work worth *** yet.

You need to read the review, dude. It's covered.

 

[SirGCal]

I'm so disappointing in the game itself... Even on Ultra with my 6970; it stink of console port. Controls are all console-oriented (not even weapon button 1-5 selection). Graphics honestly are no better than Oblivion with the High-Res texture pack. Infact, I'd dare say Oblivion would win that comparison. Textures are sloppy to down-right poor, AI movement is still unrealistic (spinning in place, etc.) Hard-hair... bla bla bla... Game developers are so freakin lazy anymore, all they know how to do is write decade old code for consoles...

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

By developing a title that can be played across all platforms, including the PC, they're limited to the weakest link or the lowest common denominator.

That is wrong.

Look at what DICE did: develop for PC, THEN port to consoles. Now everyone is happy.

This is why PC gaming is much more satisfying that console gaming, but it's also why PC gaming will be dead soon.

PC gaming is forever chained to the console business. Moral of the story? Buy a GPU that is equal or slightly better than what current consoles use. Then leave it until the console life-cycle is complete and then upgrade.

Nah, we're not. *Alt-Tabs back to The Witcher 2*

And dude... life cycle of the 360 is till 2015, as MS says... you suggest keeping something like a 8800GT till that time? :lol: I can already feel my 560 Ti having troubles in some games... SOME... very few... MUST... resist... SLI...

 

[geekapproved]

Nice to see my i3-2100 and HD5850 will play Ultra settings maxed just fine at 1680x1050.

 

[BlackHawk91]

I'm going to play this in my sempron 2600+ and my ati x300 and see how they blow up. Need a real rig now.

 

[Markon101]

Texture packs here I come.......

 

[CaedenV]

For those complaining about the graphics and visuals keep in mind about all of the previous elder scrolls games; mods are coming. There will be high res packs, and various mods for the game just give it time.

Besides, if we have learned anything this last year it is that game makers release products before they are finished (a sad side effect of DLC I think). As excited as I am about the game, I'll wait for the GOTY edition like I have for most blockbuster games. Sure you dont get to be the moron posting 'first' on every blog about the game, but at least you get to play it after they have had a chance to fix all the problems, add more features/eyecandy, release a few expansions, and play it the way it was meant to be played

 

[ano]

"The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion redefined our expectations for open world fantasy RPGs, and it was brutally hard on the hardware of it's day."

typo here

 

[cleeve]

typo here

Doh! Fixed.

 

[FunSurfer]

It was stated in the article that Skyrim resembles Oblivion but Skyrim has totally different and better gameplay experience because it doesn't have those annoying loading pauses every 20-30 seconds like Oblivion, and I don't even have a SSD...

 

[biggawhat]

I dunno....my specs are as follows:
QX6700 @ 3.47Ghz
2x8800GTX in SLI
4GB RAM, Vista 32 bit

System is 4.5 years old. I'm playing skyrim with all settings maxed, except no AA or FXAA, and shadows on medium, at 1920 x 1200 and my FPS usually hovers around 40...occasionally going above 60 indoors or in sparsely populated areas outdoors, and only rarely dips below 30's when in large towns/cities.

 

[of the way]

Does anyone complaining about the graphics not being demanding enough want to give me their old hardware? I was thrilled last Nov. to get a 5550 for $30 so I wouldn't be stuck with onboard graphics. I would love to have not top of the line hardware that can max out the settings on my small CRT monitor. Not saying that I'm happy that they didn't revolutionize with their engine, just that I'm poor (read: have a family).

Also, thank you Bethesda for using DX11 performance enhancers.

 

[Guest]

Before I carry on reading this review I need to get something straight.

It really, really amazes me that a reviewer concerned with graphics can't understand a very basic principal of video game development in this regard. The graphics don't come close to Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 in terms of visual fidelity because the data resources of this game are very different. It's very simple to understand. Anyone who has saved a JPG in a bigger resolution will know that it results in a bigger file - same concept with video games and textures. Similarly, higher polygon count (more detailed) models result in bigger files. The reason Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 look better than Skyrim is because these games take up the majority of the 360 and PS3 disc space with high quality textures and models. Skyrim takes up the disc with the sheer *quantity* of models and textures there are in the game - content. Hence, lower resolution textures and models, which means the graphics will look slightly dated in some ways.

The PC version is bound by the same data restrictions as the consoles because the game has to be consistent across all platforms for all players to have an equal experience. Of course, better models and higher quality textures could be made for the PC version and are by the modding community, but for basic business reasons, this isn't the developers concern.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Before I carry on reading this review I need to get something straight.

It really, really amazes me that a reviewer concerned with graphics can't understand a very basic principal of video game development in this regard. The graphics don't come close to Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 in terms of visual fidelity because the data resources of this game are very different. It's very simple to understand. Anyone who has saved a JPG in a bigger resolution will know that it results in a bigger file - same concept with video games and textures. Similarly, higher polygon count (more detailed) models result in bigger files. The reason Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 look better than Skyrim is because these games take up the majority of the 360 and PS3 disc space with high quality textures and models. Skyrim takes up the disc with the sheer *quantity* of models and textures there are in the game - content. Hence, lower resolution textures and models, which means the graphics will look slightly dated in some ways.

The PC version is bound by the same data restrictions as the consoles because the game has to be consistent across all platforms for all players to have an equal experience. Of course, better models and higher quality textures could be made for the PC version and are by the modding community, but for basic business reasons, this isn't the developers concern.

So consoles ARE making PC gaming worse, after all Okay, where's our hi-res texture pack, then?

Also, thank you Bethesda for using DX11 performance enhancers.

DX11 doesn't matter; The Witcher 2 doesn't have it and still looks kick-ass.

 

[of the way]

DX11 doesn't matter; The Witcher 2 doesn't have it and still looks kick-ass.

But on a low end DX11 card I like to think that it helps. (Talking about performance not quality.)

 

[brettjv]

[citation][nom]kamen_bg[/nom]I wonder why the game gives such a little difference between 2 and more cores on AMD CPU's but it seems to use 4 SB cores.[/citation]

They didn't really test the Intel's properly there. An i3 w/HT is not exactly the same as an i5 quad. They should've tested an i5 w/2 cores disabled as well, so we could see apples/apples.

 

[Dark Comet]

[citation][nom]brettjv[/nom]They didn't really test the Intel's properly there. An i3 w/HT is not exactly the same as an i5 quad. They should've tested an i5 w/2 cores disabled as well, so we could see apples/apples.[/citation]

Its just because Intels sandy bridge cores are faster per mhz compared to AMD's. Its still using 2 cores but the cores are more efficient.

 

[Dax corrin]

Once again DemonHorde butchers the Written word.. come on dude, invest in a spell-checker. You're killing me.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Once again DemonHorde butchers the Written word.. come on dude, invest in a spell-checker. You're killing me.

Funny thing is, it's actually HARDER to write this way. I know, I've tried.

 

[dontcrosthestreams]

i used to have my 955be at 3.7 but i forgot i reset it to default for some cooling changes. lol its back to 3.7 now so my 6950 2gb isnt choked anymore. running around a desolate forest at night is amazing. look at the moon or northern lights sometime

 

[Headspin_69]

[citation][nom]Cirdecus[/nom]Here's the dealevelopers need to make money. To do this effectively, they need to develop for consoles which are by far the mainstream platform for gaming.By developing a title that can be played across all platforms, including the PC, they're limited to the weakest link or the lowest common denominator. What this means is that toward the end of the console life-cycle (or even the middle for that matter), PC hardware pulls ahead, but developers cannot take advantage of the hardware if they always need their software to play on weaker console systems.I was surprised when i loaded up Skyrim and I was able to play on my 2 year old 5870 card at ultra settings. That's disappointing. The Elder Scrolls series has been seen as one of those new graphical benchmarks games, but is clearly moving away from that idea now. They've sold out to the mainstream and PC gamers are now left looking for other groundbreaking titles to push their new fancy hardware to the limit.[/citation]
[citation][nom]Cirdecus[/nom]Here's the dealevelopers need to make money. To do this effectively, they need to develop for consoles which are by far the mainstream platform for gaming.By developing a title that can be played across all platforms, including the PC, they're limited to the weakest link or the lowest common denominator. What this means is that toward the end of the console life-cycle (or even the middle for that matter), PC hardware pulls ahead, but developers cannot take advantage of the hardware if they always need their software to play on weaker console systems.I was surprised when i loaded up Skyrim and I was able to play on my 2 year old 5870 card at ultra settings. That's disappointing. The Elder Scrolls series has been seen as one of those new graphical benchmarks games, but is clearly moving away from that idea now. They've sold out to the mainstream and PC gamers are now left looking for other groundbreaking titles to push their new fancy hardware to the limit.[/citation]
that 2 year old Radeon HD 5870 is on par with Nvidia 570 so they are just playing catchup with AMD

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

that 2 year old Radeon HD 5870 is on par with Nvidia 570 so they are just playing catchup with AMD

That's a $400 card vs. a $350 one. Good catch-up, I'd say.

 

[defaulttag]

How well would my system run Skyrim?

My Specs:
Core i7 920 (Bloomfield) OCed @ 4.0GHz
EVGA 896MB GTX 275 Superclocked Edition (DX10)
6GB RAM
750 Watt Corsair PSU
Asus P6T Motherboard



Also with that, if I wanted to upgrade my GPU to a DX11 setup, what would be compatible for my PSU? SLI possible? Should I wait for nvidia's 6 series? I was thinking a single 560 Ti, then SLI later on.
Thanks in advance!

 

[Headspin_69]

That's a $400 card vs. a $350 one. Good catch-up, I'd say.

Funny cause I just bought a Radeon HD 5970 which is two HD 5870 for $400 and it rapes on the GTX 580 and the HD 5970 is an old card LOL

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

How well would my system run Skyrim?

My Specs:
Core i7 920 (Bloomfield) OCed @ 4.0GHz
EVGA 896MB GTX 275 Superclocked Edition (DX10)
6GB RAM
750 Watt Corsair PSU
Asus P6T Motherboard



Also with that, if I wanted to upgrade my GPU to a DX11 setup, what would be compatible for my PSU? SLI possible? Should I wait for nvidia's 6 series? I was thinking a single 560 Ti, then SLI later on.
Thanks in advance!

First question: I think you'll easily max it out. Second: make a separate thread. Third: DX11 is so far closer a gimmick, not worth an upgrade, IMO.