FarCry 2 Early Performance Preview @ [H]

Status
Not open for further replies.
RADEoN said:
Why is it everything turns into a red vs green war?
Click to expand...

Because most people here are twelve pretending to be thirty and dont have the maturity to hold a conversation without attacking someone who doesnt see reality the way they do.


I have this game preordered through steam but Im in the middle of a mobo swap and it may be another day or two before I actually get to play this game.
 
I wonder how it will run in my rig? I need to find a demo for this game.I dont get paid til friday so I have to wait
 
I am not sure if I should buy the PS3 or the PC version.
My PC is powerful enough but there is nothing like gaming on a 50" HDTV...
 
Tudz said:
Actually, PCGH tested both DX9 and DX10. If you look at it, CF is working for DX10 for both the 8.9 and hotfix drivers. In DX9 mode, it wasn't working for the 8.9s but it was for the hotfix drivers.
Click to expand...

Bo_Fox said:
That review also includes DX10 graphs, if you read the whole page. It shows that the X2 version had substantial improvements over the 4870.
Click to expand...
Ok.. 2 people is enough to call me out on it. geez.

I guess I need a new pair of glasses.:D
 
maleficarus said:
The resolution is set to 2560x1600, AA is disabled, and AF is at the highest level the game supports. <--------------------------------------this is why....

I don't mean to bitch, but fuck sakes. I come to the site see the headline and think, awesome--only to fire up this "preview" and see a ridiculously high resolution that only MaximumPC's dream machine could even think of using. Like please... what is the point? Just to fill article space on the site or what?

Rant over....
Click to expand...

It's a conspiracy...they want you to upgrade.;)
 
It would have been nice if they had at least mentioned lower resolutions. I can see only using the very highest resolution if that is where the only difference lies (and it appears that it may) but maybe just mention that at 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 all the cards were able to manage 60 fps at high settings. Maybe they didn't have time, but it would have been nice to at least get a sample at a lower resolution, even if it is just a preview.
 
Forceman said:
It would have been nice if they had at least mentioned lower resolutions. (snip) Maybe they didn't have time.
Click to expand...


They obviously didnt have time as they only made the preview in a few hours to give us a quick glimps of what this game is potentially capable of.
 
This was a PREVIEW.

a more thorough review was said to be coming at a later date. Why can't people get that through their heads? (I'm even one of them with the 1680x1050 and an 8800GT waiting for the thorough one).
 
Thanks for the preview [H]. :)

I'm also one of the guys who plays at 1680 x 1050 since that is the highest resolution my 22" LCD supports. I also understand [H]'s method of showing the highest playable settings in this quick and dirty preview. It doesn't take any effort at all to determine that if [H] is playing at a high resolution and achieving the performance levels shown that I will have performance levels at least the same, if not greater, with AA turned on a notch or two. Possibly even greater performance running in DX9 mode under Windows XP. :)
 
kadozer said:
Hmm which one to believe this or the other review site? Only way is to get Far Cry2 now and check myself.
Click to expand...

Sorry, next time we will lie about issues we had if they are not universal and impact every other computer system on the face of the earth. :rolleyes: Damn you people can be douches when it comes to seeing the big picture.
 
Seiuchi said:
Fair enough. But at the same time you could have at least thrown in a "current" mainstream card.

Or does that fall under the same stiuation. That being that the old top of the line is faster than the current mainstream anyway.
Click to expand...

Pretty easy to take the 4850 and extrapolate. That IS the current "mainstream" video card. Everybody here knows how their card compares to a 4850 I would guess.
 
The point you people seem to be missing is that with those few precious hours Kyle and company had to test the game, they shouldn't have wasted it on super-high resolutions. They should have done the more mainstream resolutions instead. So every "genius" telling them that they only had a few hours, have totally missed the point.

With that said, I have no major beefs with the parameters used. I find it easier to extrapolate my performance going down rather than going up. If I know it's maximum level, it's easier to see where i fall below.
 
Wow, I've never seen so much backlash over the resolution used in a PREVIEW that we had little time to work with. To add a bit more info, I did begin testing at 1920x1200 with 4X AA, but when I got to the 4870 X2 for some reason it only listed two resolutions in the game for me, 1280x800 and 2560x1600, so knowing how easy the game ran, I decided to do 2560 to get a PREVIEW up quickly and because I knew it would stress the cards in an APPLES TO APPLES scenario so would could see SCALING, I did not have time to troubleshoot why I couldn't get other resolutions, and this was at a time when AMD was out of office to help me troubleshoot the problem (we are talking after midnight.)

So, in conclusion 2560 was used, it allowed us to show very good card scaling, and we were surprised how playable the game was at this resolution with the highest in-game settings with all cards. Our full evaluation will have the normal highest playable settings section, showing what the best combo of res/aa and in-game settings are for each card. Our ap2ap testing will utilize an appropriate resolution for the testing we want to evaluate.

As always, if you don't like it, don't read it, and quit your whining, we gave you what we had in a short amount of time, and we did learn many things all expressed in the article if you read and comprehend it.
 
Thanks for the preview guys. Based on your results, I figure I'm gonna get excellent FPS and tons of eye-candy at 1600x1200 (my monitor rez) or below with my 4850.

Based on your screenshots in the Preview...this game looks like it needs AA desperately.:eek: That AK-47 in the 3rd screenshot looks horrendous (especially the barrel). I think I'm willing to lose a notch or two on rez to get some AA action.;)
 
yes! looks like i can play farcry 2 with my 4850 w/ all highest settings @ 1280x1024.
 
Brent_Justice said:
It is answered on the page under "Drivers" section, I suggest reading the article.
Click to expand...

That is when the article went down hill.....

You can clearly see from other websites that actually used the newest drivers from both camps, the 4870X2 scaled very nice in FarCry2.
 
R1ckCa1n said:
That is when the article went down hill.....

You can clearly see from other websites that actually used the newest drivers from both camps, the 4870X2 scaled very nice in FarCry2.
Click to expand...


Brent, Kyle, PLEASE dont listen to Asshats. The majority of us are glad you were able to post the PREVIEW and do the job you did with the little time you had. Jeez, these morons expect every single article you guys post to be 12 pages of testing goodness...even when the title clearly states PREVIEW!!!!!!!!
 
Brent, Kyle, [H]s,

Thanks for this preview. Please dont let the swarm of angry [placeholder] have an impact on the way you do things.
I liked the "sneak peek" that we got and im looking forward to read the complete performance analysis when it's done.
Next thing you know, people will be complaining that they don't get full movies as preview when they go to the cinema...

Anyways. Back to Far cry 2, the screenshots with grass arent impressive at all. I guess i will have to see that grass for myself to really judge. But in the screenshots, it looks like the same "set" of untextured-mono-colored-polygons is copy-pasted everywhere... really not up to Far cry and/or Crysis level...
Wait and see i guess...
 
XamediX said:
The point you people seem to be missing is that with those few precious hours Kyle and company had to test the game, they shouldn't have wasted it on super-high resolutions. They should have done the more mainstream resolutions instead. So every "genius" telling them that they only had a few hours, have totally missed the point.

With that said, I have no major beefs with the parameters used. I find it easier to extrapolate my performance going down rather than going up. If I know it's maximum level, it's easier to see where i fall below.
Click to expand...

Well said.

Brent_Justice said:
Wow, I've never seen so much backlash over the resolution used in a PREVIEW that we had little time to work with. To add a bit more info, I did begin testing at 1920x1200 with 4X AA, but when I got to the 4870 X2 for some reason it only listed two resolutions in the game for me, 1280x800 and 2560x1600, so knowing how easy the game ran, I decided to do 2560 to get a PREVIEW up quickly and because I knew it would stress the cards in an APPLES TO APPLES scenario so would could see SCALING, I did not have time to troubleshoot why I couldn't get other resolutions, and this was at a time when AMD was out of office to help me troubleshoot the problem (we are talking after midnight.)
Click to expand...

How well did the cards do at 19x12 with 4x AA? Pretty decent, or didn't you get any stats for that?
 
Enough asskissing around here? Sheez. I simply asked to verify they used the newest drivers since their data was significantly different than many other benchmarks using the same hardware for Far Cry 2 in respect to the 4870x2. Given the results of the "preview" -- I think that is sort of questionable at this point.
 
SilverSliver said:
Enough asskissing around here? Sheez. I simply asked to verify they used the newest drivers since their data was significantly different than many other benchmarks using the same hardware for Far Cry 2 in respect to the 4870x2. Given the results of the "preview" -- I think that is sort of questionable at this point.
Click to expand...

The article states the drivers we used, under the "Driver" section, it specifies the version number of NV driver, and it links to the AMD driver directly, if that aint clear enough I dunno what is. I even verified that the AMD hotfix was applied by checking the version number of the driver once it was installed against Cat 8.10, and it was a higher version.
 
Any indication on what features are being used in the DX10 version? The game site doesn't really say much of anything in terms of what "enchancements" are being used.
 
I again want to see thanks for the preview. For the final article it would be nice to see DX9 vs DX10. I know DX10 is the latest but is it really the greatest? As with Warhead it seems that the DX9 version and DX10 have minor difference that don't warrant the performance hit.
 
brent and kyle = good
most of the rest of you = bad

this game looks cool, ordered on steam tonight for 44.00
 
nissanztt90 said:
Well i sure as hell can. But why would i do that when the answers lie in the article itself, AND numerous points in this thread? Hell...a little reading comprehension goes a long way...or maybe...in your case...a little reading goes a long way?

Heres a wonderful example of logic and reasoning for you to try and digest.

The 4850 barely misses the cut at 2560x1600 or whatever the res was. Using prior knowledge that the 9800GTX is about as fast as the 4850...one can pretty accurately deduce how a 8800GT, 8800GTX, 8800GTS(G92), 9800GT, 9800GTX, will perform, since they really are fairly close to each other in playability. Maybe a max difference of 20% from end to end of the spectrum. You can figure, they will all play the game fine at 1680x1050, if the 4850 does that well at that ridiculous resolution.
Click to expand...

I would like to add, I think [H]'s article like this was meant to be Your guide when buying card based on Farcry 2. If You've been waiting for this game and are looking for an upgrade for Your current card, then this Preview tells You which card to get in order to enjoy this game.
I'm not seeing many people who would buy 8800GT now, this October, okay? So if You have 8800GT and You want this game, buy it, You'll know what kind of performance there with Your old 8800GT, if You're not satisfied, based on this little Preview You'll know which one should then.

That's just my opinion though.

Oh, and to nissanztt90, I agree with You and I'm just adding my point, my words here are absolutely not directed to You.
 
According to your review, a 280 GTX outperforms a 4870x2 which is pretty surprising, but a single 4870 outperforms a 260 GTX. Weird.

Overall, you should have turned on the AA as well to see the performance, and also benchmarked it at 1920x1200 and 1680x1050.
 
It's a bit dissapointing to see that the 4870x2 doesn't show any real performance increase, I'm running 4870 crossfire and expect similar results, which is kind of lame, nature of the beast I suppose...surely AMD have had time to get this right though, it's hardly a low profile game :/

Still 2560x1600 max settings here I come :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top