You think your system is a beast?

C

cerebrex

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
1,571
Try Colin Mcrae's DiRT. I'm running a E6600 C2D @ 3.4GHz and an overclocked 8800GTS and I get --hold on to your ass-- 1/30th of 1fps on ultra detail. Yeah, you heard me, I had to hit the reset button when I fired it up for the first time, that's how slow it ran. After some tweaking, I'm able to get about 10fps @ 1650x1080 4 multisample pass medium everything except textures/models, no mirrors.

As the game is installing you watch pictures of racing... and I remember thinking... why do these companies show pre-rendered screenshots of gameplay? They're not... it IS the game.. it looks like no game I've ever seen. This is the exact definition of "next gen graphics" when it really should be "not yet here gen graphics" since my top of the line system gets completely annihilated - I remember back in the day when you really threw the cash down you could ultra detail ANY game and not have to worry... now I'm cranking games down to medium detail wondering why I spent the bills.

Colin_Mcrae_Rally_Dirt_3.jpg


no, that's not pre-rendered.
 
fuck 10 fps in anything licks ass and makes me not want to play it till its either optimized or I get new hardware. these new games needing huge horsepower don't thrill me whatsoever. I usually upgrade regularily but my lan friends don't for a long time so they never get into it. lame process!

this game looks sweet tho =P
 
G'ßöö;1031107674 said:
fuck 10 fps in anything licks ass and makes me not want to play it till its either optimized or I get new hardware. these new games needing huge horsepower don't thrill me whatsoever. I usually upgrade regularily but my lan friends don't for a long time so they never get into it. lame process!

this game looks sweet tho =P
Click to expand...

Yeah, I could probably render this game in 3d studio max @ 1680x1050 faster than playing it in "real time"
 
dx9 and wtf? I run it at 1920x1200 at Ultra and a 8800GTS with a stock 6400 and it runs fine. a bit laggy at times but perfectly playable.

this is THE best looking driving game ever at highest resolutions.
 
Your system is good definatly but its not cutting edge. Remember that devs need to future proof their games as best as possible. That ultra setting isn't ment to be used right now. Its there for the hardware rin 6-12 months.

EDIT: OK so it looks like your just not running properly. ^^^
 
Droopz said:
Your system is good definatly but its not cutting edge. Remember that devs need to future proof their games as best as possible. That ultra setting isn't ment to be used right now. Its there for the hardware rin 6-12 months.



EDIT: OK so it looks like your just not running properly. ^^^
Click to expand...

it's beyond cutting edge processor wise. As far as video cards, I'm a couple clicks behind - but still the same model card.

Oh, I'm running Vista, that's probably the reason for the difference - as the Vista drivers for the 8800 are crap still.
 
yeah it's the demo. personally, I don't like driving games much b/c I suck at them. I mean realistic driving games like this lol. however, if they bump up the terrains and make it like a swamp or desert with lots of jumps and stuff then yeeeha
!
 
oh and that screenshot is NOT from the demo so don't be dissapointed. there's no water in the demo or that car but there is 3 different cars and types of tracks.
 
I think its a combo of vista drivers/not quite optimized graphics explaining the 1/30th of 1 fps... thats just ridiculous no matter what excuse you give.
 
see now I have to go download this demo and see how it runs. any benchmark feature built into the demo?
 
looks sick

no racing games have ever really stuck with me for the PC. Im a Gran Turismo junkie, so my acceptable racing sim game bar is very high...this looks totally bitchin.
 
cerebrex said:
Try Colin Mcrae's DiRT. I'm running a E6600 C2D @ 3.4GHz and an overclocked 8800GTS and I get --hold on to your ass-- 1/30th of 1fps on ultra detail. Yeah, you heard me, I had to hit the reset button when I fired it up for the first time, that's how slow it ran. After some tweaking, I'm able to get about 10fps @ 1650x1080 4 multisample pass medium everything except textures/models, no mirrors.
Click to expand...

You may want to check your system over, my e6600 and 8800 GTS runs in ultra mode far faster than that, it's almost playable and it runs high without any issues whatsoever.
 
I laugh and cry. I hate racing games and want to play that
I have a p4 2.8 w/ 1GB ddr2 and a 7600 GS, I dont think I can play it =[
 
dano said:
You may want to check your system over, my e6600 and 8800 GTS runs in ultra mode far faster than that, it's almost playable and it runs high without any issues whatsoever.
Click to expand...

are you running vista? I was hitting 15k in 3dmark06 in xp, but I only get 10.5k in Vista - so thats a huge difference between the two OS's... and the Vista 8800 drivers probably handle the new shaders even worse.
 
cerebrex said:
are you running vista? I was hitting 15k in 3dmark06 in xp, but I only get 10.5k in Vista - so thats a huge difference between the two OS's... and the Vista 8800 drivers probably handle the new shaders even worse.
Click to expand...

8800gts + 3.2ghz conroe should not get 15k in 3dmark06 unless it's SLI'd. There should NOT be that big of a difference between xp and vista drivers at this point for 8800 series.
 
Tzzird said:
8800gts + 3.2ghz conroe should not get 15k in 3dmark06 unless it's SLI'd. There should NOT be that big of a difference between xp and vista drivers at this point for 8800 series.
Click to expand...

I was at 4.0GHz and 670/1000 on my vid ;) TEC water chilled system. 15k was an exaggeration - actual score was 14664 - search "Pyrex" on futuremark.
 
cerebrex said:
Try Colin Mcrae's DiRT. I'm running a E6600 C2D @ 3.4GHz and an overclocked 8800GTS and I get --hold on to your ass-- 1/30th of 1fps on ultra detail. Yeah, you heard me, I had to hit the reset button when I fired it up for the first time, that's how slow it ran. After some tweaking, I'm able to get about 10fps @ 1650x1080 4 multisample pass medium everything except textures/models, no mirrors.

As the game is installing you watch pictures of racing... and I remember thinking... why do these companies show pre-rendered screenshots of gameplay? They're not... it IS the game.. it looks like no game I've ever seen. This is the exact definition of "next gen graphics" when it really should be "not yet here gen graphics" since my top of the line system gets completely annihilated - I remember back in the day when you really threw the cash down you could ultra detail ANY game and not have to worry... now I'm cranking games down to medium detail wondering why I spent the bills.

Colin_Mcrae_Rally_Dirt_3.jpg


no, that's not pre-rendered.
Click to expand...


I'm having the same problem. I'm running on Vista 32 and using Nvidia 158.43 drivers. It's an absolute slideshow. I'm thinking it has to be a driver issue. My system runs STALKER, BF2142 and C&C3 flawlessly.
 
Sipster said:
I'm having the same problem. I'm running on Vista 32 and using Nvidia 158.43 drivers. It's an absolute slideshow. I'm thinking it has to be a driver issue. My system runs STALKER, BF2142 and C&C3 flawlessly.
Click to expand...

exact same thing - and your running a GTX. Dano since your the authority it seems - you need to fire it up since your running Vista and report back.
 
Can I just interject here and say that the screenshot posted is RIDICULOUS? :eek: That's in-game? *gasp*
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Can I just interject here and say that the screenshot posted is RIDICULOUS? :eek: That's in-game? *gasp*
Click to expand...

yeah it's nuts... when you're playing it you keep thinking to yourself "I'm really playing a game that looks like this"

and also in the back of your mind you're thinking "I paid how much for 10fps?" ;)
 
I don't know why everyone's so impressed with that screenshot. It's nothing really. The water is clearly just high res textures photographed from water splashes and the ground is just photo captured textures as well. The only 'real' rendering is the car which, imho, still looks obviously like a computer game. Too clean and smooth.

All that water splash is also hiding the probably mediocre looking trees and bushes etc that give away all rally games.
 
cerebrex said:
I was at 4.0GHz and 670/1000 on my vid ;) TEC water chilled system. 15k was an exaggeration - actual score was 14664 - search "Pyrex" on futuremark.
Click to expand...

impressive. So running on xp dropped it to 10,500? That's such a drastic drop. I haven't run my system on xp, but it seems like others with the same specs using xp get about the same 3dmark06 score of 10k.
 
Can someone repost the image on imageshack? My site blocks that incoming image, so I don't get to drool over that in-game, non-pre-rendered shot, like you do.
 
spine said:
I don't know why everyone's so impressed with that screenshot. It's nothing really. The water is clearly just high res textures photographed from water splashes and the ground is just photo captured textures as well. The only 'real' rendering is the car which, imho, still looks obviously like a computer game. Too clean and smooth.

All that water splash is also hiding the probably mediocre looking trees and bushes etc that give away all rally games.
Click to expand...

!! ! !!! !! !!!! ! !! !!
MY PARADE

But when you consider that's in motion... It'll look even better.
 
When I see it in motion and the car's motion dynamics are less than perfect it'll look even less real. Unless it's motion characteristics are good. Kinda like all games where you see high res pics of character's faces which are amazing until you see them talking then it fails completely.
 
Tzzird said:
impressive. So running on xp dropped it to 10,500? That's such a drastic drop. I haven't run my system on xp, but it seems like others with the same specs using xp get about the same 3dmark06 score of 10k.
Click to expand...

I was getting 12k @ 3.2GHz 625/920 in XP

the scores seem to vary considerably sometimes... when I had my system at 3.4GHz in Vista and I had to OC my vid HIGH just to get 10k I was really confused.. then I realized my last bench was in XP.
 
spine said:
When I see it in motion and the car's motion dynamics are less than perfect it'll look even less real. Unless it's motion characteristics are good. Kinda like all games where you see high res pics of character's faces which are amazing until you see them talking then it fails completely.
Click to expand...

The physics and motion is pretty good... but the handling is arcadish to a degree.. like all mcrae rally games are. Codematers is legendary though for physics engines... ever play 1NSANE? that was amazing for the time.
 
With settings on Ultra and 16xAA/16xAF, this game runs at 30 fps and never dips under 25 which is very playable still. Atleast the frames are steady and dont dip from 5 fps back to 30 at certains times in the game. Pretty fun game, would be much better and easier if I had a Racing Wheel setup.
 
Triz08 said:
With settings on Ultra and 16xAA/16xAF, this game runs at 30 fps and never dips under 25 which is very playable still. Atleast the frames are steady and dont dip from 5 fps back to 30 at certains times in the game. Pretty fun game, would be much better and easier if I had a Racing Wheel setup.
Click to expand...

XP or Vista?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top