Far Cry 2 Dissected: Massive Amounts of Performance Data
by Derek Wilson on November 21, 2008 5:30 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Originally we had planned on doing a rather quick Far Cry 2 performance article, as the game has been anticipated for quite some time and we like to keep our benchmarks up to date with the latest and greatest titles. Unfortunately we hit some snags along the way. We've finally got all the data we can pull together ready to go, and there is quite a bit of it. Despite some issues that precluded us obtaining all the data we wanted, we do have an interesting picture of Far Cry 2 performance.
Because of the inclusion of a very robust and useful benchmarking tool, the process of collecting the data was greatly eased. Unfortunately, the benchmark tool was a bit unstable, which did mean lots of babysitting. But other than that, it was still a much nicer process to benchmark Far Cry 2 than most other games. The tool not only helps with running the benchmark, but it does a great job of collecting data. Lots of data. But we'll get to all that in a bit.
By now, many people know about the AMD driver issues that have plagued their Far Cry 2 performance and consistency. We were unable to test CrossFire because of driver issues. We didn't do a full SLI analysis because there isn't much to compare it against, but we did include two SLI configurations in order to help illustrate the potential scaling we could see from other SLI setups and to give us a target to hope CrossFire eventually hits (when it works). It is worth noting that this is the kind of issue that really damages AMD's credibility with respect to going single card CrossFire on the high end. We absolutely support their strategy, but they have simply got to execute. This type of a fumble is simply unacceptable.
Our line up tests will be an analysis of Far Cry 2 performance running with High, Very High and Ultra Quality with and without AA under DX9 and DX10. After we take a look at that we'll drill down into Ultra High quality DX10 performance and look at AMD and NVIDIA performance from top to bottom. We will touch on both built in and custom demo performance and 4xAA as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
78 Comments
View All Comments
toyota - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
I have a GTX260 with 180.48 drivers and it stutters in the benchmark and in the game. theres a little hitch even while walking around like in STALKER but not as severe. my 4670 stuttered much less in the benchmark and basically zero in the game so this is NOT an ATI only issue.Goty - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
You really can't blame AMD for having issues with the 8.10 drivers, they probably weren't given access to the game until very shortly before it was released (if at all) as a result of it being a part of the TWIMTBP program. If you consider the fact that work on the 8.11s probably began sometime a month or so before, too, there's even reason for issues there. Watch the 8.12s come out and AMD jump ahead significantly in performance (not that anyone will care by then, though).Genx87 - Monday, November 24, 2008 - link
The beta testers for the game manufacturer have access to the cards and drivers. ATI knew about this well before the release of the game.ashegam - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
why is there so little difference between the 192 260 and the 216 260?I swear I've seen reviews that put that card a good 10-20% above it's older counterpart.
PrinceGaz - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link
A good 10-20%? I very much doubt that, given that stock original GTX260's and the Core 216 later versions differ only in having 9 instead of 8 shader banks, and the equivalent increase in texture units.Under ideal conditions, that would result in a 12.5% performance increase, but in practice is likely to be little more than 5% or so as many other factors affect performance. Anything above 12.5% improvement with a Core 216 would only be possible with a driver tweak which favoured it, or unless the Core 216 was overclocked. An improvement of 5% or so over the original GTX260 is what you should expect.
CEO Ballmer - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
It does not work on Macs!http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com">http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
CrystalBay - Sunday, November 23, 2008 - link
Yeah, I Hate It, Ubisoft should be banned to making chess games for Macs.Anyhow Firing Squad backs up Dereks benches , pretty much ...
chizow - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Seems to be missing, platform used, drivers used etc. I'm guessing the 180.48s weren't used, as those results seem to be off for NV parts. If they weren't, that distinction should probably be made.phatmhatg - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
nice article. very well supported.im still going with the 260 192 though.
its just about as good as the 4870 1gb. what, im losing fewer than 10fps at 19x12?
its about 60-75 cheaper. i got my 260 for 214 after rebate. free shipping.
and heres the funny part - it came with far cry 2. so i save about 50 going with the 260 over the 4870 1gb AND i save another 50 by getting the game with it. thats 100 in savings. again - for about max 10fps less?
lastly - driver issues. i dont JUST play farcry2. i play other games. just seems - and maybe im wrong and maybe things will change - that nvidia either avoids problems with games and/or fixes them better/more quickly than amd does. i dont want to have to wait or mess with things to get my game working. i want it working when i install it.
so there are 4 good reasons to go with the 260 - cheaper, get game with card, not much slower at all, and better drivers in other games.
kr7400 - Tuesday, December 2, 2008 - link
Can you please fucking die? Preferably by getting crushed to death in a garbage compactor, by getting your face cut to ribbons with a pocketknife, your head cracked open with a baseball bat, your stomach sliced open and your entrails spilled out, and your eyeballs ripped out of their sockets. *beep* bitch
Shut the *beep* up f aggot, before you get your face bashed in and cut to ribbons, and your throat slit.