Want to run Fallujah at 100+ fps? (Video)

[Brummy]

Originally Posted by TheOak82

I'm sorry but I have to call bs on Fallujah never droping below 99FPS. I drop in the low 40's in some parts with my rig, E7300@3.8GHz/HD 4870 512mb/3.25gb RAM. Same for a friend with AMD Phenom II X4 940/HD 4870/3.25 RAM.

I've asked about FPS many times while playing Fallujah and NO ONE, that I've talked to, has been able to maintain 100FPS.

Read reviews about i7 rigs Vs C2D and C2Q and the difference with a single GPU is marginal.

As I do not use my i7 rig for gaming except for GTA 4, I don't know how it performs in PR/BF2. However, being able to sustain 75FPS in GTA 4 maxed out pretty much would enable to run fallujah sustaining 100FPS I guess

[Menigmand]

He's probably paid by the company to try whipping up some hype on this board.

You can call me a troll now if you like.

[Robbi]

Originally Posted by Deadfast

No, 32 bit version can't handle more then 3 - 3.5.


Vista 32 can thanks to its memory extension.

No such thing as a memory extension to be honest, just microsoft patched windows to say it had 4 gb, as 32 bit can see 4gb or less, just allocates it very differently depending on GPU etc etc...

[TheOak82]

If OP wants to prove us wrong then he can simply take a screenshot in Fallujah showing FPS. Walk out of US main on to the road and look SW down the road, I get 40ish FPS doing that.

EDIT: Like so:


Only 14 player in the server at the time, so FPS was over 50.

[xseeyax]

Originally Posted by TheOak82

If OP wants to prove us wrong then he can simply take a screenshot in Fallujah showing FPS. Walk out of US main on to the road and look SW down the road, I get 40ish FPS doing that.

EDIT: Like so:


Only 14 player in the server at the time, so FPS was over 50.

Originally Posted by TheOak82

I'm sorry but I have to call bs on Fallujah never droping below 99FPS. I drop in the low 40's in some parts with my rig, E7300@3.8GHz/HD 4870 512mb/3.25gb RAM. Same for a friend with AMD Phenom II X4 940/HD 4870/3.25 RAM.

I've asked about FPS many times while playing Fallujah and NO ONE, that I've talked to, has been able to maintain 100FPS.

Read reviews about i7 rigs Vs C2D and C2Q and the difference with a single GPU is marginal.

Sorry to say but your measuring sticks are a little... short. Comparing an E7300 against an i7? Honestly? You're bringing a knife to a gunfight. Half the CPU, half the RAM, and at least half the bandwidth. I'd expect half the framerates. Just an all around bad comparison. You can call BS all you like, but you really have no reason to do so.

These "reviews" you speak of really have nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I think you might have been reading some old or biased reviews, sadly. Try reading some more. You'll see the difference is quite significant.

Not to worry though! I'll post screenshots of said locations to silence the haters.

Pics are links to 1920x1200 versions with my fps now uncapped...


First of all, settings used (screen size is wrong because BF2 doesn't have option for my resolution):




Here you can see all settings are maxed, including 8xAA:



Now the shot from the spot you told me:




A little closer to the smoke/fire:




And last but not least. You can see all the blood, fire, smoke, and buildings really brings my system to its knees:




Now THAT should all be proof enough right there.

[TheOak82]

Originally Posted by xseeyax

Sorry to say but your measuring sticks are a little... short. Comparing an E7300 against an i7? Honestly? You're bringing a knife to a gunfight. Half the CPU, half the RAM, and at least half the bandwidth. I'd expect half the framerates. Just an all around bad comparison. You can call BS all you like, but you really have no reason to do so.

These "reviews" you speak of really have nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I think you might have been reading some old or biased reviews, sadly. Try reading some more. You'll see the difference is quite significant.

Not to worry though! I'll post screenshots of said locations to silence the haters.

Pics are links to 1920x1200 versions with my fps now uncapped...


First of all, settings used (screen size is wrong because BF2 doesn't have option for my resolution):




Here you can see all settings are maxed, including 8xAA:



Now the shot from the spot you told me:




A little closer to the smoke/fire:




And last but not least. You can see all the blood, fire, smoke, and buildings really brings my system to its knees:




Now THAT should all be proof enough right there.

Holy cow, I'm well impressed. Honestly I wouldn't have believed without seeing. Are those still with the 8800GTX? If yes, then with the 295's that rig is going to be insane.

Guess I'll be selling an arm and a leg now to go i7.

[TayloR016]

Originally Posted by TheOak82

If OP wants to prove us wrong then he can simply take a screenshot in Fallujah showing FPS. Walk out of US main on to the road and look SW down the road, I get 40ish FPS doing that.

EDIT: Like so:


Only 14 player in the server at the time, so FPS was over 50.

I'd settle for that lol.. its not like we can notice 100 fps anywayz

[lucky14]

My moniter maxs out around 60 FPS anyhow though...

[xseeyax]

Originally Posted by TheOak82

Holy cow, I'm well impressed. Honestly I wouldn't have believed without seeing. Are those still with the 8800GTX? If yes, then with the 295's that rig is going to be insane.

Guess I'll be selling an arm and a leg now to go i7.

Yeah that's still with the 8800. I don't think the GTX 295's will make much difference in this game at this resolution though. I mean the game is already maxed out, so we'd be counting frames I'd never see. The 295's really come into play when you're running really high resolutions, especially when you enable AA/AF/etc.

I'm putting the 295's in there because I do at some point plan on utilizing the NVidia 3D technology. I've seen it in action, and it's ridiculous. But doing so will basically cut my framerates in half because it has to render everything twice (effectively doubling the resolution). So I want to be able to run every game I play (exception maybe Crysis) at 1920x1200, full AA, full AF, 60+ fps, all in 3D. Seems like unrealistic goals but I think if any system can do it right now, it's the i7.

With that said, I won't dabble in the 3D stuff until some 24" 120 Hz monitors come out. Of course by then the GTX 300 series might be released...

I managed to find someone on YouTube with the exact same build as what mine will be once I drop the 295's in:

YouTube - Crysis - 2X GeForce 295 GTX Quad SLI, Core i7 3,20 @ 4,4 (16xAA,1920x1080,16xAniso)

That's everything maxed at 1920x1080, Ultra High, 16AA, 16AF, and while recording with FRAPS. He says 50 fps with FRAPS running, 80's without. Pretty awesome potential indeed.

[Beflar]

Originally Posted by ralfidude

Ironically, by placing it to 8xAA you will get higher FPS average.

Put the game into 2xAA and see the difference.

Lol its still funny to me, but u will actually lose FPS, hehe, still nice rig!

This is what happened to me. It blew my mind when it did happen.