Support NeoGAF

[Izzy]

 

[Slo]

How about some benches for those of us that didn't buy videocards in the last 15 minutes?

 

[Hajaz]

looks cpu limited in most cases exept the one with 1600*1200 4xAA 8xAF

 

[dark10x]

How about some benches for those of us that didn't buy videocards in the last 15 minutes?

^^^^^

 

[B'z-chan]

How about some benches for those of us that didn't buy videocards in the last 15 minutes?

I demand it. At least do the cards that have been released in the past year or something. I want to know how my 9600xt is gonna handle with HL2 and CS source.

 

[epmode]

these benchmarks aren't very interesting when you keep in mind that the beta doesn't even have all of the graphical features turned on. also, half-life 2 will be much more graphics-intensive.

 

[open_mouth_]

yeah, I'd like to know how this badboy will run on the Voodoo SLI...

 

[dark10x]

Damn, they even had it running on an Athlon 64 3800+...

Are people really that interested in benchmarks from such high-end systems?

 

[Slo]

I definetly am, but I want to see a 9600 and a 9800 thrown in the mix as well, so I can tell if it's worth upgrading.

 

[Takuan]

Man, the 6800 GT is such a pimp card.

In case anyone's interested, I get an average of 40 FPS on these specs (dips to 20 in large firefights with smoke, but usually in the 50-60FPS range):

1800+ (1.533Ghz)
512MB RAM
Ti4200 64mb

 

[dark10x]

CS:Source doesn't look very impressive at all. I just loaded up several movies on Gamespot and really, it looks like a Quake 3 engine game.

In case anyone's interested, I get an average of 40 FPS on these specs:

Have you played Doom 3? How does the performance compare? I would hope it would be MUCH faster than D3, when one considers how awful this looks in comparison. I mean, if this isn't running perfectly...I fear for HL2 itself. Then again, older nVidia cards really DO seem to run the Source engine pretty poorly...

 

[Error Macro]

Yeah, I dunno what's going on with CS:Source. I was really excited at first, but after viewing a lot of videos of it in action, it kinda looks worse than Call Of Duty, for example. Seriously, I think COD's levels all look better. Disappointing, to say the least.

 

[dark10x]

Yeah, I dunno what's going on with CS:Source. I was really excited at first, but after viewing a lot of videos of it in action, it kinda looks worse than Call Of Duty, for example. Seriously, I think COD's levels all look better. Disappointing, to say the least.

Really, we can only hope that this truly is a test of the netcode and game stability and NOT a graphics test.

 

[Kon Tiki]

CS:Source doesn't look very impressive at all. I just loaded up several movies on Gamespot and really, it looks like a Quake 3 engine game.

I agree. After all the talk about the physics engine, I was very dissapointed with CSS. I threw a nad in a car, tiny explosion, car did not move. Those basket carts are nade proof too.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

wow for not looking that great the game sure runs pretty bad




far cry was really ahead of the curve

 

[SyNapSe]

Yeah, it's odd that CS: Source looks almost outdated. It doesn't look anywhere near the level of HL2

 

[epmode]

i suppose they're saving the real upgrade for counterstrike 2.

 

[IJoel]

The 6800GT is looking more and more attractive.

iPod vs. 6800GT

FIGHT!

 

[Takuan]

Have you played Doom 3? How does the performance compare? I would hope it would be MUCH faster than D3, when one considers how awful this looks in comparison. I mean, if this isn't running perfectly...I fear for HL2 itself. Then again, older nVidia cards really DO seem to run the Source engine pretty poorly...

Doom 3 is playable (I'd wager 15-25 FPS), but CS:S is definitely smoother. Although I should add that I only have one CS:S map on the HD, and that's de_dust. The others could run worse.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

thing is those maps (dust) have like NO geometry ...I fear for HL2