Next Gen VS. Current Gen CPU: Crysis Benchmark

[RPGWiZaRD]

Yea I wonder what settings were used in the game, I would prefer seeing 1024x768 - 1024x1280, low quality comparision.

normal setting is 1024*768.

what's thee point of testing at those res ?

This has been explained so many times before. The lower the resolution the less impact GPU performance will have on the test and more load put onto the CPU, if you want to do a proper CPU performance test you don't want other factors to have an impact on the result, you only want to measure exactly that, CPU performance. There are many applications out there that doesn't use any GPU at all so why do such comparision then with the impact of GPU performance that will show a lower gap between the competitor than it actually is in reality, due to GPU performance start to manipulating the test.

I just wish reviewers started using PCSX2 PS2 emulator that I'm a BETA tester for. This is an EXCELLENT app to test real CPU performance. GPU performance impact can be made 0 and it doesn't even require to have the exact same graphics card, only a gfx card that is fast enough to not become the bottleneck and that depends on what CPU and speed you're running at and game you're testing but for some games let's say Disgaea or Final Fantasy X even a comparision such as let's say an E6600 2.4GHz paired with a X1900 Pro vs AMD X2 6000+ with a 8800GTX would be a fair comparision in this PS2 emulator since in both cases the GPUs are fast enough to not become the bottleneck and only CPU + system/mobo performance will be measured, but system/mobo performance is something you'll never get away with but this is such a small difference in this emulator we're talking like less than ~3%. The 8800GTX won't cause a single FPS increase over the 1900 Pro in this case due to these less GPU demanding titles are both being bottlenecked by the CPU performance, in other word it's either CPU or GPU performance that is being measured, by increasing render target to 4x and enabling bilinear filtering with a graphics plugin the GPU load increases signficantly and the X1900 Pro in this case would become the bottleneck. Further I just wanna meantion about this emulator that performance increase you get by overclocking scales linear with the overclocked CPU amount as long as GPU doesn't become the bottleneck. If I compare my AMD Opteron 165 and Intel E6750 CPU in signature, there's even an ~40% clock for clock advantage for the Intel CPU and at a Opteron 165 @ 2.8GHz vs E6750 3.75GHz comparision, there's usually between 72~75% FPS difference (~34% clock speed difference + ~40% IPC advantage for E6750). Seldom I see another benchmark comparision telling such IPC advantage for Intel's Core 2 Duo vs AMD K8 dual core architecture but that's due to PCSX2 being a pure CPU performance test. I will do a comparision between Conroe and Penryn later on in this application when I upgrade to Penryn to see how big difference this app tells the IPC advantage is for Penryn, if typical benchmarks shows 5~10% differences, I wouldn't be too suprised if PCSX2 shows even up to 12~15%.

So having told that I prefer low res and low quality comparisions in PC games when testing CPU performance although I still don't think PC games are the optimal test but in low res + low details at least it's a very good indication. There are apps you use that doesn't use your GPU too so therefore I don't think it's wise to test PC games in high res if you want to do a CPU performance comparision based on that.

However if overall system performance when all hardware is measured at same time then PC games at higher res and details is more interesting, however not when doing a REAL CPU performance test.

Crysis demo is so GPU dependant I think GPU performance impact is too big even in quite low resolutions.