SCLASS Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) Statistics Average FPS: 51.58 Duration: 37.05 sec CPU Usage: 47% System memory usage: 73% Video memory usage: 86% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft® Windows Vista" Home Premium Service Pack 1 Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Video Driver version: 182.46 Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio) Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli The above benchmarks give me low to mid 30s as an average in busy areas like Algonquin - is this 'right' in terms of CPU, and memory usage - I recall when I got the game in Feb (have not played in a while ) I had the following benchmarks yet still had similar in game performance. Why dont I 'see' the fps gains with my more recent benchmark above ?. Average FPS: 43.96 Duration: 37.28 sec CPU Usage: 29% System memory usage: 63% Video memory usage: 82% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Render Quality: High View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft® Windows Vista" Home Premium Service Pack 1 Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150 Video Driver version: 178.33 Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio) Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz File ID: benchmark.cli What do other people with similar setups actually get in game. As for the next patch, is performance going to be a priority for R* - difficult to get a consensus in the monster 1.05 thread. I appreciate there is a performance thread, but it does not really address the disparity between the benchmark and in game results. Edited August 20, 2009 by SCLASS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cold fusion 33 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Well, yeah, 51FPS is a good rate on screen, and, yes, it's good for an I7/GTS250, but really, if it looks good on screen to you, then that decides it for you. We can't make an opinion up for you . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCLASS Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 Well its just a little strange that when I first got the game with 43 fps in the benchmark I swear I was getting about 5 fps more in game, yet now , with a 'clean' comp and defragged hard drive I get slightly fewer fps and better benchmark result.... Just seems strange... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cold fusion 33 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Well, the ingame benchmark is thought to be a bit unreliable, so I wouldn't worry too much about it... Basically, if the game looks good to you, what would any benchmark matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now