| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (74)

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 3:23AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yea, I got a score of like... 900 and it still looks better than any other game I've ever ran on my PC... ever.
But according to their site I won't be able to run the game. I'm trying to figure out if its cheaper to upgrade my computer or just to buy a PS3,

And what the PS3 benchmark clocks in at.
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 3:35AM ChadAbs said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Son of a blank. I can't score over a 1000 with my lappy. I get stuck at 996. It seemed to run well to me. =(

Intel Core 2 Duo T6600 @ 2.20 GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GT 130M
4GB Ram
Vista Home

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 5:04AM TheGreatMachine said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Woaah, nostalgia punch crits for >9000.

I remember getting soo excited about the benchmark in 2003.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 6:17AM Pitt said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i7920@3.6ghz, 6gig, gtx260, win7x64


4400 - low settings.

Seems a newer vid card would be the way to go for me.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 6:43AM Kaoss said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Omg the combat looks like a POS. It's pretty much turn based, jump in do an attack, jump out and get hit, rinse repeat. For games that are point and click auto-attack is needed, the only games that shouldn't have auto attack are the ones where it's not PnC and you have to aim, it makes 0 sense otherwise.

I honestly prefer non PnC games but if you're gonna be point n click please make use of auto-attack, it's not like it's taking away the skill component of the game when it's obvious there's already going to be none.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 7:24AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This has to do with the whole action gage setup, you either attack normally and use a little bit of your bar or wait till it regenerates and launch stronger ones. The combat was completely overhauled from the last alpha stage so expect it to change even more as time goes on
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 7:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think anything above a 1600 would be enough for the eye, also people shouldn't freak out if their machine starts to blow up when you are running it in high. You would be running a console game at 1080p when it normally runs at 720p.

Dont expect your older cards to run current gent games at 1080p without blowing chunks everywhere.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 7:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Damn, i did it again with nothing major running in the backround and managed to get.

High-5828
Low-7926. Not too shabby.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 8:10AM Daelen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ya Shane something really off with the numbers you are getting.

The bench is 100% GPU limited. Only Phenom II X4 965 @3.8 and an ATi 4890 the CPU is at ~20% usage while the GPU is pegged at 100%. I scored ~2900 on high.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 8:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Any idea why the program won't launch? It will just start and then the dialog box will pop up that it has stopped responding and needs to close.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 10:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This happenend to me as well. Had forgotten about another game, that was running when I launched the benchmark. Try closing all applications you don't really need. Should work. Or maybe your computer is too weak even for the benchmark :/
Reply

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 9:07AM Betel said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Make sure your direct X is up to date. Windows 7 doesn't include all the parts of direct X with it sometimes, which obviously causes errors.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9226A611-62FE-4F61-ABA1-914185249413&displayLang=en

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=0CEF8180-E94A-4F56-B157-5AB8109CB4F5&displaylang=en

Get it from one of these links and try again.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 9:20AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd like to point out that, from a system standpoint, people with faster processors are probably more likely to see better performance.

The going theory between my friends and I (which I can't really confirm until launch or I get into beta) is that the game will be CPU intensive, and less GPU intensive. Since it is designed for play on the PS3 hardware architecture, and the PS3 relies heavily on CPU processing for its power, there's a fairly high chance they shaved some programming time by keeping the same relative build idea across both platforms.

They did the same thing with FFXI, if I recall rightly.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 9:26AM Daelen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Natarm, look up.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 9:34AM Betel said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As a matter of fact the lower your settings are the more CPU dependant the game is. On low settings people with good processors are likely to see better performance, but as you turn settings higher the game becomes more and more GPU dependant and processor doesn't matter as much.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 12:03PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
if people get instant "windows has encounter a problem", update gfx card drivers (i had 10.2 catalyst which gave me the error, but when upgradeing to current 10.5s it resolved the issue)

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 12:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Got a fairly close scores high vs low, 1969 on low, 1807 on high (q6600 running at stock 2.4ghz w/ intel mobo, xfx 5770 stock, 8gb ram); not too perceptible to my eye though as far as any dropped frames or anything ... access times were ridiculously high though in the +30000's. Like another poster said, 128-bit pipe on the 5770s probably will be limiting factor long-term, but game seemed pretty cpu-intensive vs gpu. Overall very nice-looking though. Luckily i have a ps3 but think it might be time soon to upgrade cpu and/or get that 5850/5870.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 2:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Core 2 duo 3ghz, 1066 ddr2 RAM, radeon 4850

Score: 3356

Runs great on inexpensive hardware. Good idea to release the benchmark app like this.

Posted: Jun 16th 2010 2:51PM Lctwo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Like Odd mentioned in an earlier post, I am quite underwhelmed by the combat mechanics/animations. The game does look great though.

Posted: Jun 17th 2010 3:02PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
THAT BENCHMARK IS SHIT!

Phenom II X2 3.5 GHZ / 2 GIGs ram / ATI HD 4850 1GIG / XP-32bit and this thing stuttered every 5 seconds. it will run in almost a straight line way up at the top of the graph then vomit down to the absolute bottom for a fraction of a second, then it's right back up to the top again. I just bought RE5 and and it runs at a pure 60 fps at all times with all settings at high (except for AA) in1920x1080.

#1 issue is that this thing wont go full screen.

#2 issue is that it's cheaply put together.

#3 issue is that this isn't a benchmark, it's a show case for the character models with a FPS counter tacked on it.

if this is supposed to simulate an in game environment where is the actual combat / skills? or is it like FFXI, where in the combat is so crappy that it has no impact on the games frame fate?

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW