F.E.A.R. Performance Database

B

Budwise

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
1,834
Please run F.E.A.R. at 1280X1024 with NO AA with Trilinear Filtering, all settings on absolute maximum except for NO soft shadows. Given suggestions from other members, this seems to be the best medium for a test bed that everyone can contribute to. This will give us a comparitive benchmark rather than everyone posting up random settings etc. Along with the scores we need at least some basic system specs ex:

A64 X000+ @ XGhz
Video Card @ ***/**** speed
#GB Memory @ X Speed...


Please leave driver settings on default rather than adjust everything to performance. If you do not know how to set it to run at this resolution here is the solution. Go to \Documents and Settings\All Users\[Shared] Documents\Monolith Productions\FEAR and open settings.cfg in a test editor such as Notepad. Change the HXW values to these

"ScreenWidth" "1280"

"ScreenHeight" "1024"

Save and exit. Make sure to set all your image quality settings before you do this tweak because going into some of the menus will reset your resolution to a lower one. Simply set your settings in FEAR, do the .cfg tweak, and then reboot the game. Go to Options, Performance, and TEST. If you dont know how to take a screenshot simply hit the "Print Screen" button, then open up MS Paint and hit Control+V to paste it. Save as, name it and your done...
 
Also ask for some kind of image for confirmation ;) I also agree with fallguy with the resolution thing but I guess there's already so many variables to consider to ahve resolution being one too...
 
if you wanna change the res, lets do it now before everyone posts up. Alot of people here are limited by the LCD screen that they use, therefore the max that i think we could ask for is 1280X1024. Otherwise a large percentage of us wont be able to run the test....
 
ok, ill kick things off here...

X2 3800+ @ 2.6Ghz
eVGA 7800GT CO 470/1100
2GB Crucial Ballistix 260Mhz 3-4-4-10 1T

FEAR1280X10242.jpg


Proof2.jpg
 
hey budwise nice concept there :) :p ...but for many people the 4aa and 8af is just overkill...we have to consider the people with low end computers aswell...why not just plain 1280x1024? and then advance it to 4aa/8af for people with higher spec comps?
 
1280X1024 no aa/af? I guess that is fine considering some older cards dont even support AA. OK, ill redo it...
 
Here is a run the way you requested. 1280x1024, max details, no soft/max shadows, no AA, Trilinear filtering, all other settings (including sound options) maxed. Specs in sig. GPU is my only overclocked component & runs @ 561/561.

fear1.jpg



Here is a run the way I actually play the game. 1024x768, max details, no soft/medium shadows, 4xAA/8xAF, all other settings maxed.

fear2.jpg


I find this to be the most acceptable performance wise. The game still tends to chug in heavily shadowed areas but I try not to let it bother me. FarCry did the same thing to me back in the day on my 9800Pro.
 
ill get a pic up in a little while..

min: 27
average: 45
max: 94

0% below 25
56% between 25 and 40
44% above 40

1280x1024, everything higest, 2xaa or 2xaf with soft shadows on is actually what i game at with this game. im more than pleased with this, and its sure to go up a bit when i get my g.skill sticks on monday, since right now im running 4x512 2t with the 266 divider, for 166mhz on the memory. gskill will put it back up to 250mhz 1t :)

athlon X2 3800+ @ 2.5ghz
2GB mixed
a8n sli premium
6800U, stock speeds (its a GT flashed to a U. it cant go much further)

edit: heh, for some damn reason, my board was running my card in x1 pcie mode. it does this every once in a while, and i dont know why. i think there is something wrong with the card, its always been quirky. rebooted, here are the scores in x16 mode..

min: 31
average: 50
max: 90

0% below 25
30% between 25 and 40
70% above 40
 
We really need more ATI tests as I seem to have a major stuttering problem with FEAR at any setting (using an X800 XL). I'm also 100% sure it's the drivers, however, 5.6 to 5.10 don't solve anything.

It seems like in this thread, and the other FEAR database thread, everyone is either on 7800 GTX, 7800 GT, or SLI with 7800 GT/GTX (and a few occasional 6800 GT here and there).
 
my x850xt pe results:
(dont know how to post pics)

min 28
avg 50
max 89

Precentage
0 under 25
32 in 25-40
68 above 40

*i think btbums score is slightly exaggerated...or not at 1280x1024
 
Carbon_Le said:
Nice score but where u running it with aa and af on fragalot?
Click to expand...

No. I ran with the settings the Original Poster asked for. I can of course re-run it with AA and AF and see what I get. The way FEAR runs I doubt it would be impressive. FEAR is a pig.
 
[BB] Rick James said:
System in my signature.
1280 X 960
2X AA 16X AF
Min: 32
Average: 94
Max: 241
FearBench.jpg
Click to expand...


Please read the original post. This thread is for everyone to run the test at 1280X1024 noAA Trilinear Filtering with all max except soft shadows. This way we can get a comparison going. If you want to post random settings, there is a thread here for that too.
 
Budwise said:
Please run F.E.A.R. at 1280X1024
Click to expand...
That's a good idea, but why 1280x1024? A 5:4 aspect ratio resolution isn't really ideal for the majority of people. 1024x768 would have been a better choice for a single selected resolution. :p

How about making 4 performance classes?

1. 1024x768 (the best common denominator, IMO)
2. 1280x1024 (LCD, 5:4 looks squished on a 4:3 monitor)
3. 1600x1200 (my chosen resolution)
4. 1920x1200 (whoa mama)

I made a set of preconfigured files to ease benchmarking here (4KB, use http download option and read the included readme.txt).

My results (min/avg/max fps, % < 25fps/% 25-40fps/% > 40fps) with a 7800GT @ 460/1180 and 81.84 drivers:
1024x768 32/71/188, 0%/13%/87%
1280x1024 33/59/139, 0%/20%/80%
1600x1200 28/48/96, 0%/42%/58%
1920x1200 i have to drag the computer over to my HDTV or a CRT to test this. Maybe later. :p

I prefer to play with the maximum settings above, but with medium volumetric light density and 0xAA/4xAF. It runs slightly better (32/48/94) than the 1600x1200 score above (28/48/96).
 
i chose 1280X1024 because it seemed to be a res that everyone could use. I started this thread off with 1024X768, but immediately got some "Why choose 1024X768?" so i changed it to try to meet everyones needs... I dunno, i give up on this thread cuz i just cant please everyone...
 
Budwise said:
I started this thread off with 1024X768, but immediately got some "Why choose 1024X768?" so i changed it to try to meet everyones needs... I dunno, i give up on this thread cuz i just cant please everyone...
Click to expand...
You just can't please fallguy. :p You had the right idea to begin with, but 1600x1200 would have eased bottlenecks on faster systems. Yep, 1024x768 and 1600x1200, that will do it. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top