X800XT PE performance on Far Cry

[Arioch]

From what most people have said about Far Cry, one of the areas in the game that really tax a system is the battle on top of the carrier. Some people are concerned about the performance of their X800XT card since they get frame rates in the lower 20s on this section. The screenshot below shows that a speedy CPU helps a lot with this card at high resolutions. I am running this on a AMD FX-53 (socket 940) system with 1GB of PC3200 memory, SB Audigy 2ZS Platinum, and X800XT PE running at a mild 525/576 overclock. I think as we start to see faster CPUs trickle out, these numbers should get even a bit better than this. I don't recall seeing my framerates drop below 30 in the game at all from what I have seen.

This is with my CP set to application preference running the Cat 4.6 drivers and putting all the graphic settings to maximum, 1600x1200 resolution, AFx16/AAx4 set in game, and corpse stay at 999 seconds. I also have the machine gunner firing at me to my rear right in the scene and the helicopter as seen to my left.

This is basically the minimum I see in this game - usually I am in the 40s range for the most part.

[PowerK]

Originally posted by Arioch
The screenshot below shows that a speedy CPU helps a lot with this card at high resolutions. I am running this on a AMD FX-53 (socket 940) system with 1GB of PC3200 memory, SB Audigy 2ZS Platinum, and X800XT PE running at a mild 525/576 overclock. I think as we start to see faster CPUs trickle out, these numbers should get even a bit better than this.

I don't think so. Are you sure about it ?

Because as you stated,

...Cat 4.6 drivers and putting all the graphic settings to maximum, 1600x1200 resolution, AFx16/AAx4 set in game

you're running the game at 1600x1200 with 4xAA / 16xAF settings. At such settings, it becomes VPU bound, not your CPU especially with Far Cry.

IMO, at such settings with Far Cry, faster CPU won't help at all. To see fps increase in this particular scenario, you need faster graphic card. Because with such settings, and in this scenario, your X800XT PE is limiting you FX-53. To verify this, lower the resolution, and disable AA/AF, and see inscrese in fps.

[Arioch]

Well I have seen some threads/posts here and on NVnews that people are getting lower minimum frame rates with the same card running at the same settings. I will go see what my none AA/AF numbers are though.

[Arioch]

Well I just ran around the same section with AA off and AF set to "1" in the Far Cry configuration utility and I was still getting frame rates in the 30s there.

I did, however, check my framerates at the checkpoint on the Training level where you are approaching the hut where you the binoculars. With 4xAA and 16xAF I get about 48 FPS there, but with them turned off I get about 70 FPS. Obviously there isn't a whole lot going on in that area. It seems to me the CPU helps with the minimum FPS at least.

[Arioch]

Someone at NVnews suggested I see what my FPS were when I blew one of the gas tanks up as I also remember it hindered my 9800 Pro more at that spot.

I tried to snap this picture as soon as it blew up - FPS stayed above 30 at all times.

[ReDeeMeR_RR]

It's a game bug.

[Arioch]

Originally posted by ReDeeMeR_RR
It's a game bug.

What game bug?

Shadows sure take a hit on this game. If I turn the shadow setting to medium I can get FPS minimum in the upper 20s running at 2048x1536 with the same 4xAA/16xAF settings.

[Imnotmortal]

Originally posted by PowerK
verify this, lower the resolution, and disable AA/AF, and see inscrese in fps. [/b]

What kind of retarded verification is that? That test will only prove that lower AA/AF or resolution will increase Frame rates. No sh*t?

The only way you can prove that its CPU bound or GPU bound is to either overclock your GPU + Overclock your CPU, keeping one of the other constant and seeing which one increases framerates more. Or you can buy a faster CPU or faster GPU, but thats not possible right now, since those are the fastest..

[Buenamos]

well since ur on the topic of cpu and limiting the x800xt. My x800xt is on order at cdw and im thinkin about selling my system and building a newer one. right now my cpu is a 2.8 @ 3.2 and I'm trying to decide whether to get a AMD64 3200 or a P4 3.2C ghz with watercooling. In my opinion I think I would get better performance out of a P4 3.2 @ 3.8 with some of my GEIL PC4200 than a AMD 3200 since we all know they don't overclock that much....what are you guys's opinion on this?

[PowerK]

Originally posted by Arioch
Well I just ran around the same section with AA off and AF set to "1" in the Far Cry configuration utility and I was still getting frame rates in the 30s there.

Interesting.

Arioch, not only AA, and AF. Lower the resolution as well. Why not try 1024x768 ? If the fps stays similar, then it's a sign of being CPU bound. And to be kind of anal about it, don't forget to exit, and restart the game whenever you change settings.

I did, however, check my framerates at the checkpoint on the Training level where you are approaching the hut where you the binoculars. With 4xAA and 16xAF I get about 48 FPS there, but with them turned off I get about 70 FPS.

Yeah, I see your point. But not necessarily more going on screen = more impact on CPU only. It can very well impact VPU as well, I think...... so I don't think it's that simple...hmm...interesting nonetheless.

[Arioch]

Well it seems to me the CPU comes into play in scenes where the video card is getting beat to hell and back. Riptide has a long thread on NVnews talking about his minimum frame rates being in the low 20s on that same area in the game on his X800XT PE and his 3DMark03 scores are in the mid 11000's, which sounds about right for his PC.

I saw somewhere in the Far Cry forums where the shadow bug that is on the game, especially on the boat level, on X800 cards is due to the game thinking there is a Nvidia card installed. I am hoping the next patch detects these cards correctly and seeing as the framerate increases I am getting in other games are phenomenal, I am hoping to see some performance increases in Far Cry also.

[PowerK]

Originally posted by Imnotmortal
What kind of retarded verification is that? That test will only prove that lower AA/AF or resolution will increase Frame rates. No sh*t?

Ask yourself.

If you lower the resolution, and disable AA/AF why does fps increase ?

[JohnnyAssSlappr]

Originally posted by Buenamos
well since ur on the topic of cpu and limiting the x800xt. My x800xt is on order at cdw and im thinkin about selling my system and building a newer one. right now my cpu is a 2.8 @ 3.2 and I'm trying to decide whether to get a AMD64 3200 or a P4 3.2C ghz with watercooling. In my opinion I think I would get better performance out of a P4 3.2 @ 3.8 with some of my GEIL PC4200 than a AMD 3200 since we all know they don't overclock that much....what are you guys's opinion on this?

Go for the P4. You could go with a P43.0C with 30caps and easily get 3.8, prolly 4.0+ with memory at 1:1. That's going to be my next upgrade other than the XT/PE.

[Arioch]

Originally posted by JohnnyAssSlappr
Go for the P4. You could go with a P43.0C with 30caps and easily get 3.8, prolly 4.0+ with memory at 1:1. That's going to be my next upgrade other than the XT/PE.

That's not a bad choice but keep in mind that the FX processors for AMD64 are unlocked and with the socket 939 motherboards out that are getting better with locking the PCI and AGP you could get some pretty good results overclocking those maybe.

[PowerK]

Originally posted by Arioch
That's not a bad choice but keep in mind that the FX processors for AMD64 are unlocked and with the socket 939 motherboards out that are getting better with locking the PCI and AGP you could get some pretty good results overclocking those maybe.

Arioch,

it's true that Athlon FX-53 comes multiplier unlocked ? If so, it is very tempting.

[PowerK]

Originally posted by Arioch
Well it seems to me the CPU comes into play in scenes where the video card is getting beat to hell and back.

I think if you're indeed being CPU limited in that particular scene, you get very similar (if not the same) fps regardless of resolution. Because resolution only taxes graphic card, not the CPU. No matter what the resolution is the work load on your CPU is the same.

[Arioch]

Originally posted by PowerK
Arioch,

it's true that Athlon FX-53 comes multiplier unlocked ? If so, it is very tempting.

Yes it does. That CPU is basically a Opteron 15X series chip with the only difference being that the FX chips are considered AMD's high end enthusiast chip and is unlocked, and why it costs more than the normal AMD64 CPUs. Also, the FX chips have a full 1MB of onboard L2 cache as opposed to 512KB on the normal AMD64's.

[avesta]

Originally posted by Arioch
Yes it does. That CPU is basically a Opteron 15X series chip with the only difference being that the FX chips are considered AMD's high end enthusiast chip and is unlocked, and why it costs more than the normal AMD64 CPUs. Also, the FX chips have a full 1MB of onboard L2 cache as opposed to 512KB on the normal AMD64's.

then overclock it and please tell us what the bottleneck is.

it's interesting to see whether it's the fastest cpu or the fastest gpu on the market that is limiting the most graphics intensive game on the market.

[::qcx:]

Strangely this haven't been a level where the game was slowgin down for me and I only have a XP3000 + 9700pro. I had problems with some interior levels somewhere in the middle of the game and in the very last interor levels, as well as in those ruins.

[Arioch]

Originally posted by ::qcx:
Strangely this haven't been a level where the game was slowgin down for me and I only have a XP3000 + 9700pro. I had problems with some interior levels somewhere in the middle of the game and in the very last interor levels, as well as in those ruins.

Well at that high level of resolution and AA/AF applied the game might be wreaking havoc on the video card. Also a game patch may help performance some as the game does not detect X800 card properly and runs the game with the R300 path. The shadow bug that is most obvious on the boat level is only showing up on X800 cards and has been pointed out as an issue that needs to be resolved by Crytek in a future patch.

[Brian48]

The carrier level is very odd. There are spots where the framerate drops down to 30fps even with my x800xt even though I'm staring a wall with nothing going on and other area where's there's crazy activity, but the fps never dips down 80fps. I think this is just an issue with this map or the game itself. I don't have any issues anywhere else in the game, not even with the incredibly intense "volcano" level.

[FearMeAll]

yeah..that's not the card's fault there.
That scene just IS NOT graphic intensive at all. It's just a floor and some boxes.
There is not reason that part should be so demanding on the system. It's not an impressive scene at all.

[dwix]

i think the farcry engine isnt the best basis for graphical testing personally..

[CheekyFellow]

I'm confused. Would a game running at 1280x1024 be CPU bound or would a powerful video card kick in and handle the load?

[Renegade_43]

Originally posted by CheekyFellow
I'm confused. Would a game running at 1280x1024 be CPU bound or would a powerful video card kick in and handle the load?

It depends on what vid card your using. Farcry @ 1280x1024 on a radeon 7200 along with an athlon 64 would most certainly be gpu bounded. If you turn down AA and res you should see a huge increase in frames.

Using the same processor but an x800xt instead of the 7200 would probably make you cpu bounded in most scenes @1280x1024. If you lower the res you should not notice much of an increase in fps. When cpu limited the vidcard is not working at its peak capacity since its sitting around waiting for the cpu to catch up. Hence you could increase res or even add AA with little to no performance hit. Up to a certain point though. Once you increase your res and AA and become gpu bound your framerates will drop off.

[CheekyFellow]

Originally posted by Renegade_43
It depends on what vid card your using. Farcry @ 1280x1024 on a radeon 7200 along with an athlon 64 would most certainly be gpu bounded. If you turn down AA and res you should see a huge increase in frames.

Using the same processor but an x800xt instead of the 7200 would probably make you cpu bounded in most scenes @1280x1024. If you lower the res you should not notice much of an increase in fps. When cpu limited the vidcard is not working at its peak capacity since its sitting around waiting for the cpu to catch up. Hence you could increase res or even add AA with little to no performance hit. Up to a certain point though. Once you increase your res and AA and become gpu bound your framerates will drop off.

So what you're saying is i'ts actually better if a game is cpu bound because then you can add additional options to improve picture quality with out a degradation in performance quality(fps)?

[Jawed]

Originally posted by avesta
then overclock it and please tell us what the bottleneck is.

it's interesting to see whether it's the fastest cpu or the fastest gpu on the market that is limiting the most graphics intensive game on the market.

Actually, if anything, it's prolly shoddy code propped up by the NVious one's $$$$, that's limiting Far Cry performance right now.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's similar to how Valve reported that coding the NV path for HL2 was taking 5 times longer than the standard DX9 path, because the NV3x cards run DX9 so badly. Crytek prolly had exactly the same problems - the fallout from which is the lame NV specific code that's still running in Far Cry when you slot in an NV40. And there's rumours that ATI X800 is being hampered on Far Cry cos the game thinks it's an NV some of the time.

What a mess.

Jawed

[RyanVM]

Originally posted by Arioch
Yes it does. That CPU is basically a Opteron 15X series chip with the only difference being that the FX chips are considered AMD's high end enthusiast chip and is unlocked, and why it costs more than the normal AMD64 CPUs. Also, the FX chips have a full 1MB of onboard L2 cache as opposed to 512KB on the normal AMD64's.

Not to mention that Opterons require slower registered DDR and the FX can use normal unbuffered DDR (at least for S939).

[Arioch]

Originally posted by RyanVM
Not to mention that Opterons require slower registered DDR and the FX can use normal unbuffered DDR (at least for S939).

Yes the FX on socket 940 requires registered memory but not on the 939. I am not going to complain though - my 940 board is good enough until next year when I decide to go to a PCI Express system.

[ellingsen1]

I have to agree with the original poster that this is one of the slowest parts of the game I have come across so far. When all hell breaks loose on the deck with all the firing, helicoters, explosions etc. the framerate can drop as low as 25FPS on my 6800 Ultra at these settings. All other areas are much better. My card is just running at stock speed though.

If anybody is interested here is a screen from the Ultra in a similar position using the same settings with the screens compressed to match the 200K original X800 pic posted (30% comp.). Taken running at stock speed. There are about 10 more in this directory also
http://pages.prodigy.net/ellingsen1/