F.E.A.R. GPU Performance Tests: Setting a New Standard
by Josh Venning on October 20, 2005 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
No Soft Shadows and No AA/AF Performance Tests
This is the setting that we would recommend most people establish. Anisotropic filtering can be enabled for a minimal performance drop, but many people just won't have hardware that can handle soft shadows or antialiasing. Also note that we have made quite a big deal about the fact that soft shadows in this game just aren't worth it.
Without soft shadows or AA enabled, you can see that until you get to a resolution as high as about 1024x768, all of these cards get playable framerates. The X1300 Pro is the most limited of these cards and can really only play this game well at 640x480 and 800x600 without AA or soft shadows enabled. But you can see how low the framerates are in general at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 for all the cards, giving us a first look at the graphical demands of this game. The 7800 GTX and 7800 GT get very respectable framerates at 1600x1200 though, and at this same resolution, the 6800 GT and X1800 XL are low, but still playable. 25 fps is about as low as we would consider barely "playable", but to really enjoy the gameplay, you'll want a framerate of about 35 fps. Now, let's look at what happens when we turn on 4xAA and 8xAF.
This is the setting that we would recommend most people establish. Anisotropic filtering can be enabled for a minimal performance drop, but many people just won't have hardware that can handle soft shadows or antialiasing. Also note that we have made quite a big deal about the fact that soft shadows in this game just aren't worth it.
Without soft shadows or AA enabled, you can see that until you get to a resolution as high as about 1024x768, all of these cards get playable framerates. The X1300 Pro is the most limited of these cards and can really only play this game well at 640x480 and 800x600 without AA or soft shadows enabled. But you can see how low the framerates are in general at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 for all the cards, giving us a first look at the graphical demands of this game. The 7800 GTX and 7800 GT get very respectable framerates at 1600x1200 though, and at this same resolution, the 6800 GT and X1800 XL are low, but still playable. 25 fps is about as low as we would consider barely "playable", but to really enjoy the gameplay, you'll want a framerate of about 35 fps. Now, let's look at what happens when we turn on 4xAA and 8xAF.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
117 Comments
View All Comments
carl0ski - Sunday, October 23, 2005 - link
I think this is an EXTREMELY bad reviewwhat card do you own?
i know i own a ATI 9600XT bought 12 months ago and runs BF2 really well at medium-high
but why dont Article like this include that info??
Either these sites have lost the plot
Or ATI and Nvidia dont want us to know that older/cheaper cards are still capable
Yes because we all just happen to be playing FEAR with Drivers not yet available.
And WHat is wrong with this list?
alot at first glance for starts ATI Radeon X1800 XT (not yet available)
ATI Radeon X1600 XT (not yet available)
dont exist on the market yet. So yes just happen to be running those on FEAR already.
This articler is to sell VIdeo Cards not fear.
Pythias - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
"This has become a never ending process that is wearing thin on me."Amen. If it wont run on whay I have now, I simply wont buy it. The software/hardware gouging can continue on without me. At least with a console, you know the games you buy are going to run on your machine.
DerekWilson - Friday, October 21, 2005 - link
The games will run fine if you turn off maximum detail setting. There still isn't a card that can run EQ2 at extreme quality mode.I see this as a good thing because games out there are finally making use of the high end hardware some people have invested in. Until this half of the year there really hasn't been much out that could really make use of high end hardware.
This is quite different than requiring high end hardware.
xsilver - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
you should have forewell known that the computer industry moves very fastif you want a bugdet gaming experience, I suggest a ps2/xbox....
no one is telling you to toss your 6800gt, its just that if you WANT to run high resolutions with AA/ansio enabled then you need the latest/greatest card, its ALWAYS been like that
deathwalker - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
xsliver...I fully understand all of what you are saying...Im 58 yrs old and have been building customs systems for about 12 years...and...I "have" by in large kept up with new technology at all of my upgrade intervals. Perhaps in my position and at my age the payback just isn't what it use to be.bob661 - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
Sounds like you aren't having fun with todays games. I choose to stick to the old stuff until I see a game I like then I'll switch. I don't play new games just because they're new. I play BF2, UT2004 (the funnest game of these 3) and sometimes COD (and probably COD2 when I have a chance to play the demo). I don't play anything else because I don't like anything else. Also, my hardware upgrade path is solely dictated by the games I play.arswihart - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
i agree the x800xt/xl should be included, i can't understand why they would beChronoReverse - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
I must have missed it, but what were the other settings used for each card?I'm particularly curious about the shader level used and the texture detail level.
Le Québécois - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
Everything was set to maximum except for the soft shadow, AA and AF.capslock99999 - Thursday, October 20, 2005 - link
I was thinking about hte RAM issue too. I used 1GB for the demo, then I upgraded to 1.5GB. It removed a lot of stuttering and felt a whole lot smoother.This was the demo, of course.
Why are 6800GTs used and not Ultras? I've found this trend recently, a little puzzling.