Don't really want to inject another demo file into the existing TF2 Benchmarks thread if people don't think this demo is an accurate representation of gameplay. I recorded this POV demo on a valve pub the day after tough break dropped on koth_highpass. It clocks in at a fair bit longer than the previous benchmark demo, but at 4 minutes of playback time at normal speed, hopefully it should more accurately represent the current state of TF2's performance.
http://puu.sh/m3k2S/1d0650ec0d.dem
Same idea should be followed as from the original thread which can be found here. As always, I'd recommend running the demo 2 times and only posting the second result so I/O doesn't interfere with your fps.
If anyone sees a problem with this demo or something that could be improved before everyone starts basing performance numbers off of it, let me know and I'll pull this demo link and try to replace it with a better one.
Disclaimer about my horrible tracking while playing heavy: I recorded this demo while playing with -default on the command line which also prevents you from changing your sensitivity away from the default of 3. For me, that means I was playing at a lovely 0.85 in/360 instead of my normal 8.5 in/360.
4843 frames 33.129 seconds 146.19 fps ( 6.84 ms/f) 17.798 fps variability
CPU and overclock: 4670k @ 4.2 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 770
Driver version: 358.50
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 2560x1440
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: custom
Shadows enabled/disabled: blobby
Don't really want to inject another demo file into the existing TF2 Benchmarks thread if people don't think this demo is an accurate representation of gameplay. I recorded this POV demo on a valve pub the day after tough break dropped on [b]koth_highpass[/b]. It clocks in at a fair bit longer than the previous benchmark demo, but at 4 minutes of playback time at normal speed, hopefully it should more accurately represent the current state of TF2's performance.
http://puu.sh/m3k2S/1d0650ec0d.dem
Same idea should be followed as from the original thread which can be found [url=http://www.teamfortress.tv/post/110429/tf2-benchmarks]here[/url]. As always, I'd recommend running the demo 2 times and only posting the second result so I/O doesn't interfere with your fps.
If anyone sees a problem with this demo or something that could be improved before everyone starts basing performance numbers off of it, let me know and I'll pull this demo link and try to replace it with a better one.
Disclaimer about my horrible tracking while playing heavy: I recorded this demo while playing with -default on the command line which also prevents you from changing your sensitivity away from the default of 3. For me, that means I was playing at a lovely 0.85 in/360 instead of my normal 8.5 in/360.
[code]4843 frames 33.129 seconds 146.19 fps ( 6.84 ms/f) 17.798 fps variability[/code]
CPU and overclock: 4670k @ 4.2 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 770
Driver version: 358.50
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 2560x1440
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: [url=http://puu.sh/m3kIr/1e314a2ce5.7z]custom[/url]
Shadows enabled/disabled: blobby
4843 frames 19.260 seconds 251.46 fps ( 3.98 ms/f) 33.929 fps variability
dx81
4843 frames 20.917 seconds 231.54 fps ( 4.32 ms/f) 33.027 fps variability
dx91
CPU and overclock: 4670k @ 4.9 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 960
Driver version: 359.06
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1920x1080 (resolution does not really impact fps, I get less than .5% diff in 4k vs 1080p)
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: slightly tweaked comanglias
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
Any reason this is 2x longer than the other benchmark demo? I am not really sure if the extra time wasted during benching is meaningful in anyway. Also is there a reason the demo is a pov and not a spectated demo? For some reason I'm getting very high fps var.
[code]4843 frames 19.260 seconds 251.46 fps ( 3.98 ms/f) 33.929 fps variability[/code] dx81
[code]4843 frames 20.917 seconds 231.54 fps ( 4.32 ms/f) 33.027 fps variability[/code] dx91
CPU and overclock: 4670k @ 4.9 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 960
Driver version: 359.06
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1920x1080 (resolution does not really impact fps, I get less than .5% diff in 4k vs 1080p)
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: slightly tweaked comanglias
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
Any reason this is 2x longer than the other benchmark demo? I am not really sure if the extra time wasted during benching is meaningful in anyway. Also is there a reason the demo is a pov and not a spectated demo? For some reason I'm getting very high fps var.
My game crashes when i try to watch the demo
4843 frames 55.313 seconds 87.56 fps (11.42 ms/f) 10.589 fps variability
AMD FX-4300 @ 3.8ghz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti
dxlevel 90
1147x620
windowed noborder
comanglia's toaster with sprays, shadows, motion blur, and color correction on (For transparent viewmodels)
[s]My game crashes when i try to watch the demo[/s]
[quote]4843 frames 55.313 seconds 87.56 fps (11.42 ms/f) 10.589 fps variability[/quote]
AMD FX-4300 @ 3.8ghz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti
dxlevel 90
1147x620
windowed noborder
comanglia's toaster with sprays, shadows, motion blur, and color correction on (For transparent viewmodels)
aieraMy game crashes when i try to watch the demo
that happened to me on the 3rd run
[quote=aiera][s]My game crashes when i try to watch the demo[/s][/quote]
that happened to me on the 3rd run
benchmark12639 frames 22.594 seconds 116.80 fps ( 8.56 ms/f) 11.787 fps variability
it actually went down a couple frames the second time but w/e
benchmark24843 frames 43.583 seconds 111.12 fps ( 9.00 ms/f) 15.957 fps variability
Same issue
CPU and overclock: 3570k @ 3.4 GHz (although turbo kicks it up to 3.8 sometimes)
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 760 Superclocked
Driver version: 353.62
dxlevel (default is 90): 95
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: tweaked Chris' dx9frames (I haven't played for a while, ok?)
Shadows enabled/disabled: enabled
With -default:
benchmark12639 frames 27.262 seconds 96.80 fps (10.33 ms/f) 7.188 fps variability
benchmark24843 frames 53.788 seconds 90.04 fps (11.11 ms/f) 11.069 fps variability
Pretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98
[quote=benchmark1]2639 frames 22.594 seconds 116.80 fps ( 8.56 ms/f) 11.787 fps variability
it actually went down a couple frames the second time but w/e[/quote]
[quote=benchmark2]4843 frames 43.583 seconds 111.12 fps ( 9.00 ms/f) 15.957 fps variability
Same issue[/quote]
CPU and overclock: 3570k @ 3.4 GHz (although turbo kicks it up to 3.8 sometimes)
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 760 Superclocked
Driver version: 353.62
dxlevel (default is 90): 95
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: tweaked Chris' dx9frames (I haven't played for a while, ok?)
Shadows enabled/disabled: enabled
With -default:
[quote=benchmark1]2639 frames 27.262 seconds 96.80 fps (10.33 ms/f) 7.188 fps variability[/quote]
[quote=benchmark2]4843 frames 53.788 seconds 90.04 fps (11.11 ms/f) 11.069 fps variability[/quote]
Pretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98
4843 frames 41.377 seconds 117.05 fps ( 8.54 ms/f) 13.940 fps variability
CPU and overclock: A8 5600k @4.0GHz
Graphics Card: ASUS Radeon 270X TOP OC
Driver version: 15.11
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Fullscreen
FPS configs enabled: slightly modified comanglias mid config
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
[code]4843 frames 41.377 seconds 117.05 fps ( 8.54 ms/f) 13.940 fps variability
[/code]
CPU and overclock: A8 5600k @4.0GHz
Graphics Card: ASUS Radeon 270X TOP OC
Driver version: 15.11
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Fullscreen
FPS configs enabled: slightly modified comanglias mid config
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
Okay, after cranking up the graphics settings and changing the dxlevel to 98 this is what I got:
benchmark12639 frames 23.016 seconds 114.66 fps ( 8.72 ms/f) 10.145 fps variability
benchmark24843 frames 40.637 seconds 119.18 fps ( 8.39 ms/f) 15.339 fps variability
I'm guessing if I overclock enough I'll get significantly higher FPS, because I'm pretty sure Haswell isn't that much better than Ivy Bridge. Am I right?
Okay, after cranking up the graphics settings and changing the dxlevel to 98 this is what I got:
[quote=benchmark1]2639 frames 23.016 seconds 114.66 fps ( 8.72 ms/f) 10.145 fps variability[/quote]
[quote=benchmark2]4843 frames 40.637 seconds 119.18 fps ( 8.39 ms/f) 15.339 fps variability
[/quote]
I'm guessing if I overclock enough I'll get significantly higher FPS, because I'm pretty sure Haswell isn't that much better than Ivy Bridge. Am I right?
//benchmark1
19.016 seconds 138.78 fps ( 7.21 ms/f) 9.395 fps variability
18.922 seconds 139.46 fps ( 7.17 ms/f) 9.424 fps variability
19.224 seconds 137.27 fps ( 7.28 ms/f) 9.394 fps variability
//AVG:
19.054 seconds 138.50 fps ( 7.22 ms/f) 9.404 fps variability
//benchmark2
41.737 seconds 116.04 fps ( 8.62 ms/f) 16.841 fps variability
40.163 seconds 120.58 fps ( 8.29 ms/f) 16.189 fps variability
40.448 seconds 119.73 fps ( 8.35 ms/f) 16.104 fps variability
//AVG:
40.783 seconds 118.78 fps ( 8.42 ms/f) 16.378 fps variability
CPU and overclock: i5 4460 @ 3.20GHz
Graphics Card: Radeon 270X
Driver version: 15.30.1025-151117a-296567C
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: full
FPS configs enabled: lqgfx
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
gonna go check to see if there's notable differences in the -dxlevel 9X's on this
e:
hookyPretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98
for whatever reason, chris' dx9frames config is actually worse for your performance. I still have no clue as to why, and comanglia's/lqgfx still gives better performance as a whole
[code]//benchmark1
19.016 seconds 138.78 fps ( 7.21 ms/f) 9.395 fps variability
18.922 seconds 139.46 fps ( 7.17 ms/f) 9.424 fps variability
19.224 seconds 137.27 fps ( 7.28 ms/f) 9.394 fps variability
//AVG:
19.054 seconds 138.50 fps ( 7.22 ms/f) 9.404 fps variability
//benchmark2
41.737 seconds 116.04 fps ( 8.62 ms/f) 16.841 fps variability
40.163 seconds 120.58 fps ( 8.29 ms/f) 16.189 fps variability
40.448 seconds 119.73 fps ( 8.35 ms/f) 16.104 fps variability
//AVG:
40.783 seconds 118.78 fps ( 8.42 ms/f) 16.378 fps variability[/code]
CPU and overclock: i5 4460 @ 3.20GHz
Graphics Card: Radeon 270X
Driver version: 15.30.1025-151117a-296567C
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: full
FPS configs enabled: [url=https://github.com/triant9/my_custom_stuff/blob/master/cfg/lqgfx.cfg]lqgfx[/url]
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
gonna go check to see if there's notable differences in the -dxlevel 9X's on this
e:
[quote=hooky]Pretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98[/quote]
for whatever reason, chris' dx9frames config is actually worse for your performance. I still have no clue as to why, and comanglia's/lqgfx still gives better performance as a whole
dx90 benchmark1:
2639 frames 20.328 seconds 129.82 fps ( 7.70 ms/f) 10.516 fps variability
dx90 benchmark2:
4843 frames 39.453 seconds 122.75 fps ( 8.15 ms/f) 16.870 fps variability
dx98 benchmark1:
2639 frames 21.516 seconds 122.65 fps ( 8.15 ms/f) 10.803 fps variability
dx98 benchmark 2:
4843 frames 40.538 seconds 119.47 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 19.021 fps variability
CPU: i7-4770k 3.5GHZ
GPU: GeForce GTX 770
Resolution 1920x1080
Fullscreen
-default
dx90 benchmark1:
2639 frames 20.328 seconds 129.82 fps ( 7.70 ms/f) 10.516 fps variability
dx90 benchmark2:
4843 frames 39.453 seconds 122.75 fps ( 8.15 ms/f) 16.870 fps variability
dx98 benchmark1:
2639 frames 21.516 seconds 122.65 fps ( 8.15 ms/f) 10.803 fps variability
dx98 benchmark 2:
4843 frames 40.538 seconds 119.47 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 19.021 fps variability
CPU: i7-4770k 3.5GHZ
GPU: GeForce GTX 770
Resolution 1920x1080
Fullscreen
-default
//-DXLEVEL TEST
//90
39.687 seconds 122.03 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 17.002 fps variability
39.694 seconds 122.01 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.706 fps variability
39.702 seconds 121.98 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.517 fps variability
39.755 seconds 121.82 fps ( 8.21 ms/f) 16.446 fps variability
39.658 seconds 122.12 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 16.480 fps variability
//AVG:
39.699 seconds 121.99 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.630 fps variability
//91
40.662 seconds 119.10 fps ( 8.40 ms/f) 17.092 fps variability
41.280 seconds 117.32 fps ( 8.52 ms/f) 16.961 fps variability
40.858 seconds 118.53 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 17.022 fps variability
40.684 seconds 119.04 fps ( 8.40 ms/f) 16.688 fps variability
40.939 seconds 118.30 fps ( 8.45 ms/f) 16.957 fps variability
//AVG:
40.885 seconds 118.46 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 16.944 fps variability
//95
39.905 seconds 121.36 fps ( 8.24 ms/f) 17.045 fps variability
39.659 seconds 122.12 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 16.496 fps variability
39.784 seconds 121.73 fps ( 8.21 ms/f) 16.490 fps variability
40.051 seconds 120.92 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 16.696 fps variability
39.864 seconds 121.49 fps ( 8.23 ms/f) 16.554 fps variability
//AVG:
39.853 seconds 121.52 fps ( 8.23 ms/f) 16.656 fps variability
//98
//it crashed on trying to get the fourth demo the first time?
//demos were consistent after another start, but still, that was weird.
40.535 seconds 119.48 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 16.828 fps variability
40.980 seconds 118.18 fps ( 8.46 ms/f) 17.149 fps variability
40.520 seconds 119.52 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 16.760 fps variability
41.356 seconds 117.10 fps ( 8.54 ms/f) 16.643 fps variability
40.163 seconds 120.58 fps ( 8.29 ms/f) 16.312 fps variability
//AVG:
40.711 seconds 118.97 fps ( 8.41 ms/f) 16.738 fps variability
//91 re-test, because it seemed inconsistent w/ the other benches
40.112 seconds 120.74 fps ( 8.28 ms/f) 16.652 fps variability
40.053 seconds 120.92 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 16.645 fps variability
40.304 seconds 120.16 fps ( 8.32 ms/f) 16.349 fps variability
40.089 seconds 120.81 fps ( 8.28 ms/f) 16.219 fps variability
41.101 seconds 117.83 fps ( 8.49 ms/f) 16.959 fps variability
40.857 seconds 118.54 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 16.629 fps variability
40.368 seconds 119.97 fps ( 8.34 ms/f) 16.292 fps variability
//AVG:
40.412 seconds 119.85 fps ( 8.35 ms/f) 16.535 fps variability
dxlevel 9X differences still look fairly minimal, and while I guess you could say 90 is the best it's also just as likely that the drops and raises came from other factors, since the gap from highest to lowest is only like 4-5 frames
[code]//-DXLEVEL TEST
//90
39.687 seconds 122.03 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 17.002 fps variability
39.694 seconds 122.01 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.706 fps variability
39.702 seconds 121.98 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.517 fps variability
39.755 seconds 121.82 fps ( 8.21 ms/f) 16.446 fps variability
39.658 seconds 122.12 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 16.480 fps variability
//AVG:
39.699 seconds 121.99 fps ( 8.20 ms/f) 16.630 fps variability
//91
40.662 seconds 119.10 fps ( 8.40 ms/f) 17.092 fps variability
41.280 seconds 117.32 fps ( 8.52 ms/f) 16.961 fps variability
40.858 seconds 118.53 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 17.022 fps variability
40.684 seconds 119.04 fps ( 8.40 ms/f) 16.688 fps variability
40.939 seconds 118.30 fps ( 8.45 ms/f) 16.957 fps variability
//AVG:
40.885 seconds 118.46 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 16.944 fps variability
//95
39.905 seconds 121.36 fps ( 8.24 ms/f) 17.045 fps variability
39.659 seconds 122.12 fps ( 8.19 ms/f) 16.496 fps variability
39.784 seconds 121.73 fps ( 8.21 ms/f) 16.490 fps variability
40.051 seconds 120.92 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 16.696 fps variability
39.864 seconds 121.49 fps ( 8.23 ms/f) 16.554 fps variability
//AVG:
39.853 seconds 121.52 fps ( 8.23 ms/f) 16.656 fps variability
//98
//it crashed on trying to get the fourth demo the first time?
//demos were consistent after another start, but still, that was weird.
40.535 seconds 119.48 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 16.828 fps variability
40.980 seconds 118.18 fps ( 8.46 ms/f) 17.149 fps variability
40.520 seconds 119.52 fps ( 8.37 ms/f) 16.760 fps variability
41.356 seconds 117.10 fps ( 8.54 ms/f) 16.643 fps variability
40.163 seconds 120.58 fps ( 8.29 ms/f) 16.312 fps variability
//AVG:
40.711 seconds 118.97 fps ( 8.41 ms/f) 16.738 fps variability
//91 re-test, because it seemed inconsistent w/ the other benches
40.112 seconds 120.74 fps ( 8.28 ms/f) 16.652 fps variability
40.053 seconds 120.92 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 16.645 fps variability
40.304 seconds 120.16 fps ( 8.32 ms/f) 16.349 fps variability
40.089 seconds 120.81 fps ( 8.28 ms/f) 16.219 fps variability
41.101 seconds 117.83 fps ( 8.49 ms/f) 16.959 fps variability
40.857 seconds 118.54 fps ( 8.44 ms/f) 16.629 fps variability
40.368 seconds 119.97 fps ( 8.34 ms/f) 16.292 fps variability
//AVG:
40.412 seconds 119.85 fps ( 8.35 ms/f) 16.535 fps variability[/code]
dxlevel 9X differences still look fairly minimal, and while I guess you could say 90 is the best it's also just as likely that the drops and raises came from other factors, since the gap from highest to lowest is only like 4-5 frames
Intel i7 980X @ 3.33 Ghz
NVIDIA GTX 680
Intel DX58SO Motherboard
12 GB DDR3 Crucial RAM
1250 Watt OCZ ZX Series PSU
Win 10 64 bit
-dxlevel 98
NO SETTINGS
Benchmark1
2639 frames 30.320 seconds 87.04 fps (11.49 ms/f) 4.948 fps variability
2639 frames 30.268 seconds 87.19 fps (11.47 ms/f) 4.830 fps variability
2639 frames 30.257 seconds 87.22 fps (11.47 ms/f) 4.761 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 61.267 seconds 79.05 fps (12.65 ms/f) 8.259 fps variability
4843 frames 60.865 seconds 79.57 fps (12.57 ms/f) 8.013 fps variability
4843 frames 60.631 seconds 79.88 fps (12.52 ms/f) 8.089 fps variability
-----
LQGFX - SHADOWS ENABLED
Benchmark1
2639 frames 21.894 seconds 120.53 fps ( 8.30 ms/f) 7.497 fps variability
2639 frames 21.820 seconds 120.95 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 7.657 fps variability
2639 frames 21.836 seconds 120.86 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 7.374 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 48.883 seconds 99.07 fps (10.09 ms/f) 11.690 fps variability
4843 frames 48.661 seconds 99.52 fps (10.05 ms/f) 11.308 fps variability
4843 frames 48.531 seconds 99.79 fps (10.02 ms/f) 11.368 fps variability
-----
COMANGLIA - NO SHADOWS
Benchmark1
2639 frames 20.703 seconds 127.47 fps ( 7.85 ms/f) 8.590 fps variability
2639 frames 20.556 seconds 128.38 fps ( 7.79 ms/f) 8.106 fps variability
2639 frames 20.583 seconds 128.21 fps ( 7.80 ms/f) 7.982 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 44.706 seconds 108.33 fps ( 9.23 ms/f) 13.371 fps variability
4843 frames 44.593 seconds 108.61 fps ( 9.21 ms/f) 13.098 fps variability
4843 frames 44.364 seconds 109.17 fps ( 9.16 ms/f) 13.242 fps variability
-----
COMANGLIA - SHADOWS ENABLED
Benchmark1
2639 frames 24.349 seconds 108.38 fps ( 9.23 ms/f) 6.311 fps variability
2639 frames 24.283 seconds 108.68 fps ( 9.20 ms/f) 6.225 fps variability
2639 frames 24.257 seconds 108.79 fps ( 9.19 ms/f) 6.177 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 48.295 seconds 100.28 fps ( 9.97 ms/f) 12.249 fps variability
4843 frames 48.032 seconds 100.83 fps ( 9.92 ms/f) 11.783 fps variability
4843 frames 48.267 seconds 100.34 fps ( 9.97 ms/f) 11.691 fps variability
Intel i7 980X @ 3.33 Ghz
NVIDIA GTX 680
Intel DX58SO Motherboard
12 GB DDR3 Crucial RAM
1250 Watt OCZ ZX Series PSU
Win 10 64 bit
-dxlevel 98
[code]NO SETTINGS
Benchmark1
2639 frames 30.320 seconds 87.04 fps (11.49 ms/f) 4.948 fps variability
2639 frames 30.268 seconds 87.19 fps (11.47 ms/f) 4.830 fps variability
2639 frames 30.257 seconds 87.22 fps (11.47 ms/f) 4.761 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 61.267 seconds 79.05 fps (12.65 ms/f) 8.259 fps variability
4843 frames 60.865 seconds 79.57 fps (12.57 ms/f) 8.013 fps variability
4843 frames 60.631 seconds 79.88 fps (12.52 ms/f) 8.089 fps variability
-----
LQGFX - SHADOWS ENABLED
Benchmark1
2639 frames 21.894 seconds 120.53 fps ( 8.30 ms/f) 7.497 fps variability
2639 frames 21.820 seconds 120.95 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 7.657 fps variability
2639 frames 21.836 seconds 120.86 fps ( 8.27 ms/f) 7.374 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 48.883 seconds 99.07 fps (10.09 ms/f) 11.690 fps variability
4843 frames 48.661 seconds 99.52 fps (10.05 ms/f) 11.308 fps variability
4843 frames 48.531 seconds 99.79 fps (10.02 ms/f) 11.368 fps variability
-----
COMANGLIA - NO SHADOWS
Benchmark1
2639 frames 20.703 seconds 127.47 fps ( 7.85 ms/f) 8.590 fps variability
2639 frames 20.556 seconds 128.38 fps ( 7.79 ms/f) 8.106 fps variability
2639 frames 20.583 seconds 128.21 fps ( 7.80 ms/f) 7.982 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 44.706 seconds 108.33 fps ( 9.23 ms/f) 13.371 fps variability
4843 frames 44.593 seconds 108.61 fps ( 9.21 ms/f) 13.098 fps variability
4843 frames 44.364 seconds 109.17 fps ( 9.16 ms/f) 13.242 fps variability
-----
COMANGLIA - SHADOWS ENABLED
Benchmark1
2639 frames 24.349 seconds 108.38 fps ( 9.23 ms/f) 6.311 fps variability
2639 frames 24.283 seconds 108.68 fps ( 9.20 ms/f) 6.225 fps variability
2639 frames 24.257 seconds 108.79 fps ( 9.19 ms/f) 6.177 fps variability
Benchmark2
4843 frames 48.295 seconds 100.28 fps ( 9.97 ms/f) 12.249 fps variability
4843 frames 48.032 seconds 100.83 fps ( 9.92 ms/f) 11.783 fps variability
4843 frames 48.267 seconds 100.34 fps ( 9.97 ms/f) 11.691 fps variability[/code]
4843 frames 26.225 seconds 184.67 fps ( 5.42 ms/f) 29.391 fps variability
CPU: 4820K @ 3.7GHz
GPU: GeForce GTX 760
dxlevel: 81
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: custom
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
[quote]4843 frames 26.225 seconds 184.67 fps ( 5.42 ms/f) 29.391 fps variability[/quote]
CPU: 4820K @ 3.7GHz
GPU: GeForce GTX 760
dxlevel: 81
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: custom
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
CPU and overclock: i5 2500k@ 4.5 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 770
Driver version: 358.91
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: slightly modified comanglias for High Quality PCs
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
benchmark2
-dx81
4843 frames 30.841 seconds 157.03 fps ( 6.37 ms/f) 18.844 fps variability
-dx95
4843 frames 35.007 seconds 138.35 fps ( 7.23 ms/f) 17.257 fps variability
-default
4843 frames 39.049 seconds 124.02 fps ( 8.06 ms/f) 13.828 fps variability
benchmark1
-dx81
2639 frames 13.884 seconds 190.07 fps ( 5.26 ms/f) 11.847 fps variability
-dx95
2639 frames 15.991 seconds 165.03 fps ( 6.06 ms/f) 9.901 fps variability
-default
2639 frames 18.701 seconds 141.11 fps ( 7.09 ms/f) 8.397 fps variability
CPU and overclock: i5 2500k@ 4.5 GHz
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 770
Driver version: 358.91
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: slightly modified comanglias for High Quality PCs
Shadows enabled/disabled: disabled
[code]benchmark2
-dx81
4843 frames 30.841 seconds 157.03 fps ( 6.37 ms/f) 18.844 fps variability
-dx95
4843 frames 35.007 seconds 138.35 fps ( 7.23 ms/f) 17.257 fps variability
-default
4843 frames 39.049 seconds 124.02 fps ( 8.06 ms/f) 13.828 fps variability
benchmark1
-dx81
2639 frames 13.884 seconds 190.07 fps ( 5.26 ms/f) 11.847 fps variability
-dx95
2639 frames 15.991 seconds 165.03 fps ( 6.06 ms/f) 9.901 fps variability
-default
2639 frames 18.701 seconds 141.11 fps ( 7.09 ms/f) 8.397 fps variability
[/code]
benchmark1
2639 frames 16.747 seconds 157.58 fps ( 6.35 ms/f) 11.098 fps variability
2639 frames 16.138 seconds 163.53 fps ( 6.12 ms/f) 9.740 fps variability
benchmark2
4843 frames 33.339 seconds 145.26 fps ( 6.88 ms/f) 20.281 fps variability
4843 frames 32.644 seconds 148.36 fps ( 6.74 ms/f) 19.510 fps variability
CPU and overclock: 4460 @ 3.2 GHz
Graphics Card: R9 280X OC
Driver version: 15.30.1025
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: comanglias for High Quality PCs with picmip -1 and cart/player glow
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
[code]benchmark1
2639 frames 16.747 seconds 157.58 fps ( 6.35 ms/f) 11.098 fps variability
2639 frames 16.138 seconds 163.53 fps ( 6.12 ms/f) 9.740 fps variability
benchmark2
4843 frames 33.339 seconds 145.26 fps ( 6.88 ms/f) 20.281 fps variability
4843 frames 32.644 seconds 148.36 fps ( 6.74 ms/f) 19.510 fps variability[/code]
CPU and overclock: 4460 @ 3.2 GHz
Graphics Card: R9 280X OC
Driver version: 15.30.1025
dxlevel (default is 90): 98
Resolution: 1920x1080
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: comanglias for High Quality PCs with picmip -1 and cart/player glow
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
dx81
4843 frames 38.307 seconds 126.42 fps ( 7.91 ms/f) 16.746 fps variability
dx91
4843 frames 42.029 seconds 115.23 fps ( 8.68 ms/f) 15.303 fps variability
CPU and overclock: AMD FX-8350 @4.10GHz OC /turbo disabled
Graphics Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7850 OC
Driver version: 15.11
Resolution: 1024x768
Full-screen or windowed: Fullscreen
FPS configs enabled: chris dx9frames
Shadows enabled/disabled: enabled
[code]
dx81
4843 frames 38.307 seconds 126.42 fps ( 7.91 ms/f) 16.746 fps variability
dx91
4843 frames 42.029 seconds 115.23 fps ( 8.68 ms/f) 15.303 fps variability
[/code]
CPU and overclock: AMD FX-8350 @4.10GHz OC /turbo disabled
Graphics Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7850 OC
Driver version: 15.11
Resolution: 1024x768
Full-screen or windowed: Fullscreen
FPS configs enabled: chris dx9frames
Shadows enabled/disabled: enabled
trashhookyPretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98
for whatever reason, chris' dx9frames config is actually worse for your performance. I still have no clue as to why, and comanglia's/lqgfx still gives better performance as a whole
Most likely because it's years old and hadn't been updated for years when comanglia's configs came along.
Here's my results with comanglia's High Qualiy config and dxlevel 98:
benchmark12639 frames 17.162 seconds 153.77 fps ( 6.50 ms/f) 10.164 fps variability
benchmark24843 frames 35.387 seconds 136.86 fps ( 7.31 ms/f) 19.551 fps variability
And with dxlevel 81:
benchmark12639 frames 15.579 seconds 169.40 fps ( 5.90 ms/f) 12.497 fps variability
benchmark24843 frames 32.447 seconds 149.26 fps ( 6.70 ms/f) 20.174 fps variability
Even though I get an increase of ~15 fps on dx8, I think I should stick with dx9 since Valve seems to be supporting dx8 less and less. Obviously many people actually need that increase and should keep using dx8 until Valve removes it completely.
Also I assume overclocking will help a lot anyway, so it's kinda moot.
[quote=trash]
[quote=hooky]Pretty sure something's not right, gonna try cranking up the quality and changing the dxlevel to 98[/quote]
for whatever reason, chris' dx9frames config is actually worse for your performance. I still have no clue as to why, and comanglia's/lqgfx still gives better performance as a whole[/quote]
Most likely because it's years old and hadn't been updated for years when comanglia's configs came along.
Here's my results with comanglia's High Qualiy config and dxlevel 98:
[quote=benchmark1]2639 frames 17.162 seconds 153.77 fps ( 6.50 ms/f) 10.164 fps variability[/quote]
[quote=benchmark2]4843 frames 35.387 seconds 136.86 fps ( 7.31 ms/f) 19.551 fps variability
[/quote]
And with dxlevel 81:
[quote=benchmark1]2639 frames 15.579 seconds 169.40 fps ( 5.90 ms/f) 12.497 fps variability
[/quote]
[quote=benchmark2]4843 frames 32.447 seconds 149.26 fps ( 6.70 ms/f) 20.174 fps variability
[/quote]
Even though I get an increase of ~15 fps on dx8, I think I should stick with dx9 since Valve seems to be supporting dx8 less and less. Obviously many people actually need that increase and should keep using dx8 until Valve removes it completely.
Also I assume overclocking will help a lot anyway, so it's kinda moot.
4843 frames 34.412 seconds 140.74 fps ( 7.11 ms/f) 20.736 fps variability
1920x1080 fullscreen
dx81
comanglia cfg with shadows enabled
4670k 4.0 GHz
780 Ti superclocked
[code]4843 frames 34.412 seconds 140.74 fps ( 7.11 ms/f) 20.736 fps variability[/code]
1920x1080 fullscreen
dx81
comanglia cfg with shadows enabled
4670k 4.0 GHz
780 Ti superclocked
The problem with the other demo is that it didnt contain a lot of stuff that affected performance that was added after that, like skins, unusual weapons, (maybe killstreak effects too?), particles from new taunts, etc...
Does this demo include any of that? Because that would be the best way to fully test performance compared to that old demo
The problem with the other demo is that it didnt contain a lot of stuff that affected performance that was added after that, like skins, unusual weapons, (maybe killstreak effects too?), particles from new taunts, etc...
Does this demo include any of that? Because that would be the best way to fully test performance compared to that old demo
the POV itself is a heavy with a skin, and it's on one of the significantly less-optimized of the new maps
unless you can somehow get a whole bunch of rich tf2 players into a single server, it'd be difficult to get a good benchmark keeping in mind every single way the game can stutter
the POV itself is a heavy with a skin, and it's on one of the significantly less-optimized of the new maps
unless you can somehow get a whole bunch of rich tf2 players into a single server, it'd be difficult to get a good benchmark keeping in mind every single way the game can stutter
comanglias maxfps (with picmic -1)
4843 frames 36.982 seconds 130.95 fps ( 7.64 ms/f) 22.624 fps variability
4843 frames 35.765 seconds 135.41 fps ( 7.38 ms/f) 21.056 fps variability
4843 frames 35.015 seconds 138.31 fps ( 7.23 ms/f) 21.400 fps variability
4843 frames 36.075 seconds 134.25 fps ( 7.45 ms/f) 22.449 fps variability
-default launch
4843 frames 50.813 seconds 95.31 fps (10.49 ms/f) 12.595 fps variability
4843 frames 50.693 seconds 95.54 fps (10.47 ms/f) 12.504 fps variability
4843 frames 50.851 seconds 95.24 fps (10.50 ms/f) 12.582 fps variability
-autoconfig launch
4843 frames 50.413 seconds 96.07 fps (10.41 ms/f) 13.558 fps variability
4843 frames 49.177 seconds 98.48 fps (10.15 ms/f) 13.115 fps variability
4843 frames 49.123 seconds 98.59 fps (10.14 ms/f) 12.893 fps variability
1920x1080 fullscreen
dx95
i7 2600
660 Ti
Was trying flame's procedure with autoconfig stuff, no luck.
What's fun autoconfig makes my game look way worse than default and still gives me almost the same fps.
comanglias maxfps (with picmic -1)
[code]4843 frames 36.982 seconds 130.95 fps ( 7.64 ms/f) 22.624 fps variability
4843 frames 35.765 seconds 135.41 fps ( 7.38 ms/f) 21.056 fps variability
4843 frames 35.015 seconds 138.31 fps ( 7.23 ms/f) 21.400 fps variability
4843 frames 36.075 seconds 134.25 fps ( 7.45 ms/f) 22.449 fps variability[/code]
-default launch
[code]4843 frames 50.813 seconds 95.31 fps (10.49 ms/f) 12.595 fps variability
4843 frames 50.693 seconds 95.54 fps (10.47 ms/f) 12.504 fps variability
4843 frames 50.851 seconds 95.24 fps (10.50 ms/f) 12.582 fps variability[/code]
-autoconfig launch
[code]4843 frames 50.413 seconds 96.07 fps (10.41 ms/f) 13.558 fps variability
4843 frames 49.177 seconds 98.48 fps (10.15 ms/f) 13.115 fps variability
4843 frames 49.123 seconds 98.59 fps (10.14 ms/f) 12.893 fps variability[/code]
1920x1080 fullscreen
dx95
i7 2600
660 Ti
Was trying flame's procedure with autoconfig stuff, no luck.
What's fun autoconfig makes my game look way worse than default and still gives me almost the same fps.
trashthe POV itself is a heavy with a skin, and it's on one of the significantly less-optimized of the new maps
unless you can somehow get a whole bunch of rich tf2 players into a single server, it'd be difficult to get a good benchmark keeping in mind every single way the game can stutter
Would submitting a demo with a bunch of unusual people be helpful?
Since there needs to be actual gameplay involved, how long and a mix of effects + explosions ?
Just curious as I may be able to help here, got mates with hats.
[quote=trash]the POV itself is a heavy with a skin, and it's on one of the significantly less-optimized of the new maps
unless you can somehow get a whole bunch of rich tf2 players into a single server, it'd be difficult to get a good benchmark keeping in mind every single way the game can stutter[/quote]
Would submitting a demo with a bunch of unusual people be helpful?
Since there needs to be actual gameplay involved, how long and a mix of effects + explosions ?
Just curious as I may be able to help here, got mates with hats.
dx95 with comanglias high pc fps config
i7 4790k + gtx 970
4843 frames 26.940 seconds 179.77 fps ( 5.56 ms/f) 25.871 fps variability
4843 frames 25.574 seconds 189.37 fps ( 5.28 ms/f) 26.090 fps variability
-autoconfig
4843 frames 28.549 seconds 169.64 fps ( 5.89 ms/f) 24.040 fps variability
-default rip
4843 frames 38.246 seconds 126.63 fps ( 7.90 ms/f) 16.074 fps variability
dx95 with comanglias high pc fps config
i7 4790k + gtx 970
[code]
4843 frames 26.940 seconds 179.77 fps ( 5.56 ms/f) 25.871 fps variability
4843 frames 25.574 seconds 189.37 fps ( 5.28 ms/f) 26.090 fps variability
[/code]
-autoconfig
[code]
4843 frames 28.549 seconds 169.64 fps ( 5.89 ms/f) 24.040 fps variability
[/code]
-default rip
[code]
4843 frames 38.246 seconds 126.63 fps ( 7.90 ms/f) 16.074 fps variability
[/code]
4843 frames 22.424 seconds 215.98 fps ( 4.63 ms/f) 29.082 fps variability
CPU and overclock: 4690k @ 3.5 GHz
Graphics Card: Radeon hd 7770
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1600x900
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: Slightly tweaked comanglia's
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
[code]4843 frames 22.424 seconds 215.98 fps ( 4.63 ms/f) 29.082 fps variability[/code]
CPU and overclock: 4690k @ 3.5 GHz
Graphics Card: Radeon hd 7770
dxlevel (default is 90): 81
Resolution: 1600x900
Full-screen or windowed: Full
FPS configs enabled: Slightly tweaked comanglia's
Shadows enabled/disabled: off
KarlaieraMy game crashes when i try to watch the demo
that happened to me on the 3rd run
my game cannot play this demo whatsoever - it crashed when I tried to play it 5 times in a row for me :\
[quote=Karl][quote=aiera][s]My game crashes when i try to watch the demo[/s][/quote]
that happened to me on the 3rd run[/quote]
my game cannot play this demo whatsoever - it crashed when I tried to play it 5 times in a row for me :\