Core2duo E6750 @ 2,66 ghz with HD4870 (standard)
1x efb scale 109 fps
2x efb scale 111 fps
3x efb scale 82 fps
1x
2x
3x
1x efb scale 109 fps
2x efb scale 111 fps
3x efb scale 82 fps
1x
2x
3x
Gpu Dolphin Benchmark. - Discontinued
|
01-05-2011, 07:55 PM
Core2duo E6750 @ 2,66 ghz with HD4870 (standard)
1x efb scale 109 fps 2x efb scale 111 fps 3x efb scale 82 fps 1x 2x 3x
Intel Xeon E3110 (AKA core 2 duo 8400) 3.5ghz OC
EVGA 8800 GTS 512 (G92) 678 core 1728 shader 972 memory (stock settings) -desktop resolution 1080p with aero still on, in case you're wondering 1x 138 fps 2x 133 fps 3x 86 fps Crashes with AA cant upload screenshots for some reason though. 01-05-2011, 11:39 PM
(01-05-2011, 10:55 PM)jeffb8810 Wrote: Intel Xeon E3110 (AKA core 2 duo 8400) 3.5ghz OC Try to compress them to .jpg or upload them to imageshack if you want. 01-05-2011, 11:54 PM
(01-05-2011, 03:54 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: No. Can somebody find that post I made where I explained the efb scale/internal resolution in detail? I really don't feel like typing all that again. Took me ages to find it, but here you are (12-12-2010, 11:08 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: ugh..... uhm, plus some corrections of mine: (12-12-2010, 08:33 PM)NeoBrain Wrote:(12-12-2010, 11:08 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: I should also point out that the numbers I just used are for 4:3 aspect ratio games. The native efb resolution is different for 16:9 games (720 x 528 I believe? not completely sure). Dolphin maintains the native aspect ratio by scaling equally both vertically and horizontally and placing black bars on the sides or top/bottom.
Core i7 860 @ 3,2 ghz with 9600gt @650 core, 1750 shaders and 900 memory.
1x efb scale 200 fps 2x efb scale 125 fps [color=#FF0000]3x efb scale 68 fps[/color] Core2duo E6750 @ 2,66 ghz with HD4870 (standard), 1x efb scale 109 fps 2x efb scale 111 fps [color=#FF0000]3x efb scale 82 fps[/color] The HD 4870 is undoubtedly a better GPU than the 9600GT judging by the 3x efb scale fps. However, this is a Core i7 compared to a Core 2 Duo series. It's almost like comparing a P4 to a Core 2.
[color=#3366ff]CPU: Intel Core i7 4790K OC'ed @ 5GHz[/color]
[color=#339933]GPU: MSi N580 Lightning Extreme 3GB[/color] [color=#cc3333]RAM: CORSAIR Vengeance Pro 16GB DDR3 @ 2666MHz[/color] [color=#333333]HDD: Samsung 840 Pro SSD 512GB[/color] [color=#6666ff]CPU cooler: Noctua NH-U14S w/Noctua NF-A15 PWM 140mm Premium[/color] [color=#ff3333]MOBO: Asus Maximus VI Hero LGA 1150 Z87[/color] [color=#cc3399]CASE: Thermaltake Urban T81 Full Tower[/color] 01-06-2011, 05:10 AM
(01-06-2011, 03:41 AM)tuanming Wrote: Core i7 860 @ 3,2 ghz with 9600gt @650 core, 1750 shaders and 900 memory. Which shows exactly how much a good graphic card matters with dolphin in the end, especially with a modern hi res monitor. Now if the core i7 had the HD 4870 and experienced similar fps drop percentage, the fps with 3x efb scale should have been 144, instead they are 68. This is just some of the interesting info you can get from such benchmarks. 01-06-2011, 07:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2011, 07:51 AM by NaturalViolence.)
Quote:Took me ages to find it, but here you are Thank you! Quote:Which shows exactly how much a good graphic card matters with dolphin in the end, especially with a modern hi res monitor. Well you've clearly managed to find an area in a game where cpu emulation is lightning fast, thus allowing you to do such a benchmark without having to worry to much about emulated cpu bottlenecks. But this is extremely rare if you look at all games. I'de also like to point out that so far nobody with a decent video card (no offense to the guy with an 8600gt) has received less than 60 fps with a 3x efb scale. So if anything I believe this actually reinforces the idea that dolphin DOESN'T need a top of the line video card. At least that's how I interpreted the data so far.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 01-06-2011, 08:30 AM
(01-06-2011, 07:49 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote:Quote:Took me ages to find it, but here you are Many people nowdays use hi res monitors (they are dirt cheap and good quality overall), it is good to know from which point onward the gpu isn't a constraining factor to the cpu. And none of these cards managed to achieve it actually. An efb scale of 3x is basically used by default in normal builds when someone has such a monitor (efb set to integral), or when fractional produces glitches and thus integral is used. Overclocking the cpu is something many use yet it is risky and not beneficial in the long run. Getting a proper gpu and not overclock like crazy your cpu when it is not needed really is something that can make a world of difference to many. For example you can hear all over the place that Mario Galaxy 2 is demanding and you need a highly clocked cpu, where in reality it is a gpu demanding game (there are a lot of other games that are way more cpu demanding than Mario Galaxy 2 actually). Some hard numbers can help in such cases. 01-06-2011, 10:30 AM
Quote:And none of these cards managed to achieve it actually. I would disagree with that. All of these cards except the 8600gt manage to pull over 60 fps with a 3x efb scale. And bottlenecks from memory bandwidth and cpu throughput vary a lot. You are testing one of the few places where not a lot of cpu throughput is needed, normally achieving 200 fps with framelimiting off is not achievable for most heavier games regardless of how powerful your gpu is. Quote:For example you can hear all over the place that Mario Galaxy 2 is demanding and you need a highly clocked cpu, where in reality it is a gpu demanding game (there are a lot of other games that are way more cpu demanding than Mario Galaxy 2 actually). I would be interested to see you prove this. I have tested SMG2 pretty thoroughly and my results do not line up with that. Out of the games I have: TP: Usually bottlenecked by memory bandwidth. WW: CPU heavy SMG2: CPU heavy and GPU heavy but especially CPU. NSMB: Not very heavy on either. DKCR: CPU heavy MP: GPU heavy and CPU heavy, depends on the area.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 01-06-2011, 10:48 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2011, 10:52 AM by Starscream.)
I really don't think you can say that with any real certainty. What would need to be done for a real benchmarking thread would be this:
1) Run WW on the same processor, same video card and change the ram to see if there is any difference. 2) Run WW with the same processor, same ram and switch out video cards to see if there is any difference. 3) Run WW with the same video card, same ram and switch out processors to see if there is any difference. The point would be to keep most of the system exactly the same and change each part separately to see what made the biggest impact.
Asus Laptop: K53TA
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium, 64-Bit - SP1 CPU: AMD Llano A6-3400M, Quad-Core, 1.4GHz-2.6GHz (Overclocked) GPU: AMD Radeon HD6650M, 1GB GDDR3 (Catalyst 13.1) RAM: Samsung 4GB DDR3-1333 |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|