Whats your FFXIV Benchmark score?

[JofaMang]

Squeenix recently released a PC benchmark for FFXIV:
http://www.finalfantasyxiv.com/media/benchmark/na/download.html

I took the liberty to assemble a small selection of screen shots from the Benchmark.
http://picasaweb.google.ca/116531494448543089976/FFXIV?authkey=Gv1sRgCPH1vv_b0-edNg#5483453258179232882

High: 2380
Low: 4227

I should note that I am 100% sure that this benchmark was not using my crossfire.

 

[Gamer-girl]

high: 2514 (2800 with an overclocked gpu)

Low: 4506


Other's are saying that the benchmark doesn't register crossfire and sli setups

 

[AMW1011]

I'll test that right now.

 

[AMW1011]

Low with SLI enabled: 3303
Low with SLI disabled: 3242

Nope it does not utilize SLI.

 

[Gamer-girl]

I read somewhere that because the test is in windowed mode, it defaults to GPU 1.

Low settings is more dependent on CPU whereas high setting utilizes the GPU.

 

[AMW1011]

Despite my best efforts I can not find a way to make it full-screen.

 

[Gamer-girl]

I don't think you can...the alpha also runs in a window

 

[Rustyy117]

High: 5233 Load time: 30964 ms

Spec's in sig

 

[Guest]

High: 4514
Low: 4775
Load Time both: 18000

WIN 7 64bit
Q6600 @ 3,4Ghz
4 GB RAM
Radeon HD 5870 , fully overclocked (ATI Overdrive)

 

[Triton05]

Low : 4400
High : 3260

Load Time : 11250



System in Sig.

 

[Senkyo]

Low: 749
High: didn't even bother

Windows 7 -64 bit
Intel Core i5-430M 2.26GHz Turbo Boost 2.53GHz
NVidia GT325M 1GB DDR3 VRAM (read below)
4GB of DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM

Unfortunately, it only wants to read my Integrated Graphics card, thanks to my Optimus technology. Which I think is the reason for my low score. I can’t seem to get it to read my GT325… I've gone to the nVidia control panel, but that didn't help. Annoyance.

 

[Guest]

High: 3596
Low: 5050

windows 7 64bit
i7 cpu 920 @ 2.67GHz
ati radeon HD 5970 x 2

 

[houdinii]

i want to see some one with a 480 do it iv seen all over youtube and forums ppl with 5870s but no 480s

 

[D3LTA09]

High: 4533
Load Time 16817ms

Core i7 920 @ 3.8ghz
6gb ddr3 tri channel
5870 cf OC'd (but as people have said only 1 card is utilized).
WD Black 500gb hdd
7 64bit

Yea would be interesting to see a 480?

 

[Chaiwallah]

With an AMD dual-core 5600+ 2.8GHz processor, 4GB RAM, and an Nvidia GTX275 GPU, I got a low resolution score of 2242 and a high resolution score of 2232. The benchmark won't run on my ASUS G73jh-A1 with the i-7 720 with 8GB RAM and ATI 5870 GPU even after updating the DX files to get the missing DX9 .dll file.

 

[Chaiwallah]

I installed and ran the benchmark on high resolution on another computer with an AMD quad-core Phenom II 920 2.8GHz processor, 4 GB RAM and an Nvidia GTX 260 GPU and got a score of 2659 for what it's worth.

 

[jammert19]

low: 5790... specs in sig, I really wonder what a 5970 would do (dual GPU) or a GTX 480 if possible

 

[Chaiwallah]

I'm inclined to think the benchmark is severely flawed.

 

[houdinii]

y do you think its flawed? because of what it takes to get a high score?? square enix already stated that it will take a preaty dam good computer to run it. its not wow where a 10 year old single core proccesor computer could run it.

 

[jammert19]

I think they might have gimped it a bit so expectations could be more realistic. Not too much though, I'm content with my score for now ^^

 

[Chaiwallah]

y do you think its flawed? because of what it takes to get a high score?? square enix already stated that it will take a preaty dam good computer to run it. its not wow where a 10 year old single core proccesor computer could run it.

Did you see my previous posts? A difference of 10 between high and low quality is very suspicious at the least. If the requirements are as high as the benchmark suggests, who's going to play it? And how old are you anyway? Your argument is weak, and you can't spell "pretty" and "damn".

 

[notty22]

low 4100 load time 12921ms
put on my ssd to see if that gave a 'fast' loading time ?
xfx 4770 o/c @925

 

[Triton05]

Did you see my previous posts? A difference of 10 between high and low quality is very suspicious at the least. If the requirements are as high as the benchmark suggests, who's going to play it? And how old are you anyway? Your argument is weak, and you can't spell "pretty" and "damn".

The lower resolution is more CPU dependent.

A high score of 4000 on low and 4000 on high means the system is pretty balanced top end. A quick CPU at lower range that fully opens up the GPU and a hardy enough GPU on the high run to not falter to the higher textures.

A high score of 2000 on the low and 2000 on the high shows signs of a graphics card bottlenecked by its CPU. The cpu can only drive the gpu so hard. Again, running it on high quality and seeing a similar score is further proof that the GPU can only compensate so much.

Take my run, 4300 low, 2900 high. My E8400 at 4.0Ghz is tapping out my GTX285. IF I were to slap in a GTX470 Im sure you'd see my low end score pretty much stay the same, while the high quality run would be much higher.

Hope that helps understanding.

 

[Basetank]

High 1626
Low 2702
core2duo e 8400@3.0 G
4 GB ram
dual 8800GT's which is N/A as it only uses one card
win 7 64 bit
just glad to know that more than likely I will be able to run the game

 

[Averagegai]

Anyway to see your score in High when your resolution is so low that almost half the benchmark is out of your monitor's viewing range?

I tried to drag the window up to view the score at the bottom corner, but I couldn't find a way to do that.