Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim: PC Performance, Benchmarked

[mt2e]

I'v been playing straight since release and didn't even realize Nvidia stepped up so quick.


When I get home from work I'll install the new Nvidia drivers and see how those + all these tweak and config changes enhance/improve gameplay experience......we'll see if the 560TI x2 can stretch instead of 1 starring at the other.


The game itself is amazing(VERY IMMERSIVE) and am enjoying the new UI even tho it is console inspired, it is efficient and effective.

....btw check out this ambient occlusion tidbit....

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1038008766&postcount=5

 

[cleeve]

Don, did you write the captions for the photos? lol... I like 'em.

Yeah, glad you enjoyed them. You an tell how much sleep I've gotten by the captions.
If they're goofy... not so much.

 

[Guest]

@Arkz ....im playing this on my....
thnx for posting your info.

I got an aol rig with an evga88oogtx an amd athlon ii x3
i see no reason to upgrade to a newer rig
the good thing is i can increase the budget to buy a better one.
Thnx for posting.

.......well this is just an expansion...but with a new colsolish engine...
i love the oblivion series,but think ill wait to see if they get rid of the consolish interface...

 

[Guest]

how will my rig handle Skyrim?
Dual-core 3.2ghz processor
nVidia 9800gt graphics card
4gb ddr2 ram

 

[cleeve]

how will my rig handle Skyrim?
Dual-core 3.2ghz processor
nVidia 9800gt graphics card
4gb ddr2 ram

9800 GT is a bit better than the GT 420 GDDR5. Check the charts!

 

[Headspin_69]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]9800 GT is a bit better than the GT 420 GDDR5. Check the charts![/citation]
Med Setting depending on how good your CPU is if it is the Phenom II x2 555 @ 3.2ghz your good to go.

 

[ITsonic]

Hey can you do a PC Performance, Benchmarked for Need For Speed: The Run?

 

[kryojenix]

I've been a bit disappointed to have to turn anti-aliasing down or off to get performance from my Phenom II 3.2GHz Hex-core and Radeon HD 5970!!! ... I've only got 4GB of RAM though, so maybe I should shut down Firefox while I play!

 

[kryojenix]

nb - also running at 2560 x 1600, which is probably partly the reason - though I did try stepping back to 1920 x 1200 to keep the AA/AF settings, but it just wasn't smooth enough still. Waiting for a CrossFire driver, I know, but I still thought I'd get better from the equivalent of a "single Radeon 5850". (Maybe it's time to overclock!)

 

[bystander]

After spending a few hours with the game, I can add that this game is awesome with Nvidia 3D vision.

 

[Guest]

Would I be able to play it?

I have a Samsung Series 7 Chronos from Best Buy.

I have a quad Core i7 clocked at 2.2 GHz, but my graphics card is the AMD Xeymour with 512mb video memory. I do have 6GB ram, though. Could I play?

 

[gallovfc]

There is a concern about this CPU speed chart, you simply CAN'T buy a 2.0GHz Phenom II, OR a 4GHz Core i5. But, there are Phenoms x4 with higher core speed than 3.5GHz.
So, what was the point of showing overclocked i5s and downclocked Phenoms, when the availability is the oposite ?
There ARE many i5s under 3GHz and two Phenoms x4 above that.

 

[Guest]

Running Skyrim on i5-750 OC to 3.5 and a dual 6950's (crossfire disabled till AMD get's off their butts, amirite?) and I tried the adaptive setting. It provided the benefit described in this article of better AA on transparent textures like leaves. HOWEVER the setting has created two types of bugs that are remedied by either MSAA or Supersampling. The first I noticed is that non-transparent textures becoming transparent. Torsos, roofs, candles, even a wall in a dungeon once, letting me see the guard on the other side. The second bug is on the ground and walls where textures overlay other textures, so you have ivy on walls, or cobblestone and hay on the ground, instead of showing up as they should, only one texture can be seen, with sharp edges between.
Hope this helps anyone that's been annoyed by these issues, and couldn't solve the problem (by turning off adaptive AA).

 

[Onus]

Nice article. I should be able to play with all or mostly all "Ultra" settings (970BE & 560Ti), and will just have to dorque around with the AA settings to find what looks best.

 

[Headspin_69]

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Nice article. I should be able to play with all or mostly all "Ultra" settings (970BE & 560Ti), and will just have to dorque around with the AA settings to find what looks best.[/citation]
for you max AA/AF and all on Ultra or high at leased but I find the FXAA looks better turned off IMHO because is blend and smooths to much and decreases the definition.I run an AMD Phenom II x2 555 BE @ 3.8ghz and a GTX 275 and run the game on high with full in game AA/AF and i get about 50 to 60fps mostly locked at a smooth 60fps and it took me all day to find the right settings while playing the ga,me

 

[bystander]

[citation][nom]Budillu[/nom]Running Skyrim on i5-750 OC to 3.5 and a dual 6950's (crossfire disabled till AMD get's off their butts, amirite?) and I tried the adaptive setting. It provided the benefit described in this article of better AA on transparent textures like leaves. HOWEVER the setting has created two types of bugs that are remedied by either MSAA or Supersampling. The first I noticed is that non-transparent textures becoming transparent. Torsos, roofs, candles, even a wall in a dungeon once, letting me see the guard on the other side. The second bug is on the ground and walls where textures overlay other textures, so you have ivy on walls, or cobblestone and hay on the ground, instead of showing up as they should, only one texture can be seen, with sharp edges between.Hope this helps anyone that's been annoyed by these issues, and couldn't solve the problem (by turning off adaptive AA).[/citation]

The point was to show you a range of speeds. The slower clocks are to give you an idea what mobile and older CPU's will do, and the upper end for those who overclock.

 

[cleeve]

There is a concern about this CPU speed chart, you simply CAN'T buy a 2.0GHz Phenom II, OR a 4GHz Core i5. But, there are Phenoms x4 with higher core speed than 3.5GHz.
So, what was the point of showing overclocked i5s and downclocked Phenoms, when the availability is the oposite ?
There ARE many i5s under 3GHz and two Phenoms x4 above that.

You're overthinking this. It's meant as a guideline to show what kind of performance you can expect from a range of clocks and architechtures. Having said that, there are a lot of Phenom II/Athlon IIs out there in the 2.5 GHz range, and the 2.0 GHz speed might give some notebook users an idea of what they can expect from mobile parts.

As far as 3.5 GHz, I can't understand your issue. the fastest Phenom II X4 is 3.7 GHz, that's almost insignificant. I'm just rounding to 500 MHz. The highest you can push a Phenom II, reasonably, is in the 4 GHz range and as you can see with the 3.0 GHz Phenom II vs i5 benches, that's not going to give the Phenom IIs an advantage. The sandy bridge IPC is too strong.
Not to mention, sandy bridges will overclock to 4.5 GHz plus relatively easily, so it's not like I'm not pushing them hard, either. I use 4.0 GHz Core i5-2500K for my baseline game testing because, frankly, it delivers enough performance to shift the bottleneck to the graphics card in most cases, and I haven't seen an unlocked Sandy bridge that couldn't handle 4 GHz without any tweaking. You can't say the same for Phenom II.

If you think a 4.0 GHz Phenom II bench is going to make a notable difference, you're fooling yourself. Frankly, it sounds like you're trying to drum up some AMD vs. Intel sentiment where none exists.

 

[Rob423]

How come the GTX580 wasn't used?

 

[nebun]

where is the dx11 support?

 

[cleeve]

How come the GTX580 wasn't used?

No need to, it maxes out with the GTX 570.

 

[alexleov]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Just look at 6850/GTX460 and 6970/GTX 570. The 560 Ti and 6950 will be in the middle of those, closer to the higher end though.[/citation]

I have a AMD6950 with an i5 2500k and 8gb ram and i can run on ultra at 2560x1440 at 60fps most of the time. according to fraps it does drop to about 45 from time to time but no perceivable lag

 

[darkgauntlett]

i've got an i5 750 and a 2gb 6950 and it runs on ultra near perfect. Only noticeable drop was fight with 2 giants and 2 mammoths in the wild. only lasted till i died anyway. Does anyone notice the quiet audio? I've got to push my sound system to 30 to hear comfortably while BF3 is near deafening at 19.

 

[soccerdocks]

[citation][nom]darkgauntlett[/nom] Does anyone notice the quiet audio? I've got to push my sound system to 30 to hear comfortably while BF3 is near deafening at 19.[/citation]

Yes, I do. The in game sound is adjusted as high as it goes but I still have to have my system volume more than twice as high as usual. Its very annoying.

 

[darkgauntlett]

[citation][nom]soccerdocks[/nom]Yes, I do. The in game sound is adjusted as high as it goes but I still have to have my system volume more than twice as high as usual. Its very annoying.[/citation]

And it doesn't handle surround sound nearly as well as Oblivion did. Triple screen is also a no go until someone figures out a Mod. Graphics are fine but menus are useless. Bethesda says they don't support it. Big disappointment. This is the Elder Scrolls 4S...not 5.

 

[ezareth]

Not sure how this game is CPU bound when my CoreI7 920 2.66 processor only running about 40% utilization at load.

Running two 6970s in crossfire (I also don't understand why people are saying it doesn't work because I'm showing both of my cores pegged at100%.). Able to run max everything full AA and FXAA as well as a custom AA sharpening mod that improves the looks as well. I can't get an accurate FPS counter since I can't find one on the console commands but it is as fluid and smooth as any game I've played.

I'm a little irked at the whole console thing port thing and controls but the game is amazing and beautiful.