speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Just ran the timedemo on my 2.4ghz barton 9700p @ 370/340 1024x768 max details..... Is this fast or what?

Date / Time: 16/10/03 15:14:07 (478632ms)
2400MHz, 512MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=4.14.1.191 Shader=1.4
C:\PROGRAM FILES\MICROSOFT GAMES\HALO\HALO.EXE -timedemo" (Version=1.0.2.581)
Frames=4700
Total Time=86.76s
Average frame rate=54.17fps
Below 5fps= 2% (time) 0% (frames) (2.412s spent in 4 frames)
Below 10fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 7% (time) 2% (frames)
Below 30fps= 21% (time) 8% (frames)
Below 40fps= 30% (time) 14% (frames)
Below 50fps= 39% (time) 21% (frames)
Below 60fps= 57% (time) 40% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Normal
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= Medium
###Video Options###
Resolution= 1024 x 768
Refresh rate= 85 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= Yes
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High



<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 
Why do neither the time or frames add up to 100%?

Barton 2500+, 512MB Corsair Platinum XMS 3200 CL2, Radeon 9700, WD Raptor 10,000 rpm S-ATA HDD, Asus A7V600, Enermax 460W SilentPlus PSU.
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Because it goes over 60fps???? Remember it averages at 54 so it probably goes upto 100 at some points. I just copied the timedemo.txt.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Just checked the latest anand halo bench with latest patch but...
Our testbed remained the same:
AMD Athlon64 FX51
1GB DDR400 (2x512MB)
ASUS nForce3 motherboard

The 9800XT Gets 60fps on this beast of a setup, the 9700p gets 47, so my barton system isnt that much slower than a new A64 and 9800XT rig!

*Hugs his pc*


<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

maxbero

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2003
1
0
18,510
Why did you use the pixel shader 1.4?
Please, repeat the bench using the pixel shader 2.0
C:\Programmi files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe -use20 -timedemo
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Ok I just ran it with ps2? 9700p @ 370/340

Date / Time: 16/10/03 16:36:52 (722966ms)
2400MHz, 512MB, 128M ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (DeviceID=0x4e44) Driver=4.14.1.191 Shader=2.0
C:\PROGRAM FILES\MICROSOFT GAMES\HALO\HALO.EXE -use20 -timedemo" (Version=1.0.2.581)
Frames=4700
Total Time=88.31s
Average frame rate=53.22fps
Below 5fps= 2% (time) 0% (frames) (2.456s spent in 4 frames)
Below 10fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 3% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 25fps= 7% (time) 1% (frames)
Below 30fps= 22% (time) 9% (frames)
Below 40fps= 31% (time) 15% (frames)
Below 50fps= 39% (time) 21% (frames)
Below 60fps= 59% (time) 42% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Normal
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= Medium
###Video Options###
Resolution= 1024 x 768
Refresh rate= 85 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= Yes
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High


<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

scottchen

Splendid
Jun 3, 2003
5,791
0
25,780
Speedy, I did 60 frames at 1600/1200 full graphics, 4x aa 8x af. HEHEHEHE

-Intel PIV 2.6C @ 3.51G -Asus P4P800 -OCZ Copper 2x256 4000EL memory @ 270mhz 2.5-4-4-8 -Sapphire 9800pro @ 490/780 -SB audigy -120G Maxtor Diamond Plus9 S-ATA150 hdd -450 Enermax PSU
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
LOL well thats you and your 450mhz+ 9800pro and 3.5gig p4 etc.....

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

scottchen

Splendid
Jun 3, 2003
5,791
0
25,780
I don't really think my frames should be this high, I think FRAPS is a little bit drunk.

-Intel PIV 2.6C @ 3.51G -Asus P4P800 -OCZ Copper 2x256 4000EL memory @ 270mhz 2.5-4-4-8 -Sapphire 9800pro @ 490/780 -SB audigy -120G Maxtor Diamond Plus9 S-ATA150 hdd -450 Enermax PSU
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Run the timedemo then?

Create a new shortcut on the desktop and edit it to
"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Halo\halo.exe" -use20 -timedemo" or wherever its installed

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

Willamette_sucks

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2002
1,940
0
19,780
But were you and the A64 FX/9800 P setup using the EXACT same settings? You have particles off too:( And low sound quality/variety.

SIGNATURE: Stop asking people "whats up" or "hows it goin", you know you don't give a sh*t. And noone cares how you're doing either.

"We are far less than we knew." - Bright Eyes
 

Ion

Distinguished
Feb 18, 2003
379
0
18,780
Your 9700pro is overclocked to 9800pro level anyway so it wasnt really that surprising to see you getting near XT level of performance. Your result indicates ported Halo is poorly coded graphically.

Ps. why do anandtech still use that unWHQLed 52.xx driver is beyond me...and it is always funny to see Nvidia get spanked in <i>the way it is...</i> game like "tron 2".
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
I have to use low sound quality because my sound card is poo. I have everything maxed out in the gfx options so how do i enable particles or whatever??? TBH I just set up my system how it should be, just like anand should do with their Athlon FX system. Im only using 2/3/3/10 memory timings and nothing special....

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Anyone who has halo, get the latest patch. It never slows down at all now for me, even in doors with loads of enemies on screen it stays super smooth!!! Thats why I get so high fps in the timedemo...

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

lhgpoobaa

Illustrious
Dec 31, 2007
14,462
1
40,780
what a patch for the demo?

heh. i must get it and have a look at it.

<b>I am not a AMD fanboy.
I am not a Via fanboy.
I am not a ATI fanboy.
I AM a performance fanboy.
And a low price fanboy. :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
 

Ion

Distinguished
Feb 18, 2003
379
0
18,780
I just remember something about halo timedemo. It use cut scenes as the benchmark instead of the actual gameplay... :evil:
 

draxsath

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2003
99
0
18,630
um, somthing that everyone seems o be forgetting...

Halo is an old game, it was meant to come out for PC like a year or two ago. back when i had my Geforce 2 GTS (and when it was top of the line too). thats why this game runs so well....

getting awsome framerates on it is like bragging about getting high quake 2 framerates.

*is not impressed*
 

Willamette_sucks

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2002
1,940
0
19,780
Yeah really dude. Runs well compared to what? Its a demanding game. I know the GF2 and beyond supported bump mapping, but like the FX5200 and pixel shaders, they were too slow to use it. Bump mapping is just now being seen in games, and is fairly demanding (given the complexity/amount).

SIGNATURE: Stop asking people "whats up" or "hows it goin", you know you don't give a sh*t. And noone cares how you're doing either.

"We are far less than we knew." - Bright Eyes
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
No im not impressed either. I mean some 5900ultra systems get <50fps. So what would impress you, 100fps? The highest I've seen is over at anand and their A64FX + 9800XT rig @ 60fps. Even when I max the settings out with ps2 and high sound quality etc I still get 52fps.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 

speeduk

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2003
1,476
0
19,280
Oh and something else I remembered. Halo is an old game in a sense yes, but its designed to run @ 640x480 on an xbox console. So basically it needs a powerful cpu/memory and graphics setup to run @ 1024x768. Also it uses new dx9 techniques like Pixel shader 2.

People moaning about its perf should accept the fact that if a game is designed for a console, running it on a pc at higher resolutions with better quality gfx will need superior hardware to run at high fps.... Thats why some ports don't even allow you to up the resolution beyond 640x480.

Now if it cant run at 50fps @ 640x480, that would be a good reason to moan! I'm just happy it plays well and looks great, and with the latest patch, I suppose a 9600pro could handle it at 800x600.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7000747" target="_new"> 3D-2001 </A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1284380" target="_new"> 3D-03 </A>
<font color=red> 120% overclocker </font color=red> (cheapskate)
 
First of all it was scheduled to come out on the MAC first, not PCs (that was later). Second this version has alot of visual enhancements including alot of DX9 effects added since th porting to Xbox.

Also a game like Morrowind is relatively old too, yet it'll bring ANY system's FPS down under the right circumstances.

The age of a game has very little to do with the stress it puts on a system. I'm sure FS2004 with everything cranked will still give the R42X/NV40 some troubles at times, despite it being 'old' by then.

Also I did't see alot of people 'bragging' about getting AWESOME framerates on it. If aything people are simply talking about the mediocre FPS they get on medium setting and mid-res. Some are just getting BETTER fps than others despite having what would commonly be killer rigs, they are still feeling he FPS pinch.



- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK :evil:
 

TRENDING THREADS