PC Upgrade for FarCry 3

Eboggles

Dcully wrote: »

Destroys?
Pulverises?

Fanboy much?

Come off it, regardless of what site you or I link to benchmarks there is little between them overclocked or not while your playing a game.

Ill say again, go with the cheapest because to the naked eye you WILL NOT notice the slightest difference.

"Pulverises" and "Detroys" is just a tad over reaction.

I don't mean to come off as a fanboy, as I like to think that when I make statements that use strong words such as pulverize, I can back it up with proper evidence.

So, let's take [H]'s review of a Galaxy GeForce 660ti 3GB, an ASUS GTX 670 DCII TOP, and an XFX HD7950 Black Edition.

• Galaxy 660ti equivalent price on HWVS: it actually isn't on, but there is a TwinFrozr 3GB 660ti which runs 50mhz lower. That comes in at €317 euro, so we'll say that the Galaxy would be €325? €330?

• ASUS GTX 670 DCII TOP price on HWVS: €407.20

• XFX HD7950 Black edition price on HWVS: €295-ish? as non-black edition is €289

Also, this is not running the Never Settle series of Drivers for AMD, which give a 7% increase on HD7950 performance.

Exhibit A:

In Witcher 2 we see the overclocked HD 7950 again take a large lead over the other video cards, providing the best performance from start to finish. The GALAXY GTX 660 Ti overclocked video card lagged quite a bit behind the other two in this game, it was still a playable setting, but you could definitely tell there was a performance difference.

Exhibit B:

In Skyrim we were impressed how well the HD 7950 did when we overclocked it to this level. It received a large performance increase from stock HD 7950 clock speeds and came out on top in this game delivering 16% better performance than the overclocked GTX 670 with 8X MSAA at 2560x1600 in this game. The overclocked GTX 670 was 17% faster than the GALAXY GTX 660 Ti GC overclocked video card. Note, while the differences were large in this game, this setting was still playable on each video card tested here at these clock speeds.

Exhibit C:

Our GALAXY GeForce GTX 660 Ti GC 3GB video card when overclocked to its maximum potential holds itself up well to an overclocked GTX 670 and overclocked HD 7950 in this game. It seems our overclocked HD 7950 is actually the fastest card in this game when we overclocked it to near 1.2GHz, we are averaging 63 FPS. The overclocked GTX 670 is right behind it at 59.6 FPS and then the overclocked GALAXY GTX 660 Ti is behind that at only a 3 FPS average loss of 56.4 FPS.

We were surprised to see the GALAXY GTX 660 Ti so close to the GTX 670's overclocked performance, both are very close and would be impossible to tell apart in actual gaming. Also to our surprise was the lead the HD 7950 has when it is overclocked in this game. Worth mentioning we have see AMD performance increase with drivers recently released.

It goes on, and on and on.

So to recap; the HD7950 beats a pimped out GTX 660ti, and a GTX 670 TOP in gaming, and it costs less

But I'm a fanboy, so just ignore this post. :rolleyes:

Dcully

Many more reviews suggest otherwise, i guess its a lot to do with where you get your info.

For example

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

I too could go on and on linking countless reviews and benchmarks of differing opinions.
Thats exactly my point, things are that close even the professionals cannot decide 100%

Personally i dont care who makes a gfx card once it gives me bang per buck,for sure the 7950 seems to exactly that right now , i just disagree that it pulverises and destroys its direct competition the 660ti and 670.

Eboggles

Dcully wrote: »

Many more reviews suggest otherwise, i guess its a lot to do with where you get your info.

For example

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

I too could go on and on linking countless reviews and benchmarks of differing opinions.
Thats exactly my point, things are that close even the professionals cannot decide 100%

Personally i dont care who makes a gfx card once it gives me bang per buck,for sure the 7950 seems to exactly that right now , i just disagree that it pulverises and destroys its direct competition the 660ti and 670.

It may have been a slight overestimation of its abilities .

EDIT: That Techreport review measures them at stock.

tuxy

I don't actually own either of those card. But they do seem to be very close at stock, however would I be right in thinking a 10-15% overclock on the core would be average for a 660 ti and a 30-40% overclock would be average for a 7950?

Andy!!

tuxy wrote: »

So a 660ti is definitely the way to go rather than a 7950?

According to the FC3 benched anyway And AC sure looks purdy with all the physX, playing it now. Its a good card though I would suggest you dont get the asus version, too loud.

There are a lot of ati fanboys around so its hard to get straight info sometimes. For one thing I doubt benchmarkers turn off physX when making the benches; thats gonna be a 10-15 frame hit at least.

Ati fanboys love their graphs and hunting down every last frame, but I doubt if my eyes would be able to detect a 60-73 frame difference. Sure in two-three years when that becomes a 40-60 difference but by then I'll want a new toy Right now I need extra features.

D4RK ONION

Anyone played this on the 7870? If so, how does it run for you?

Dcully

Andy!! wrote: »

According to the FC3 benched anyway And AC sure looks purdy with all the physX, playing it now. Its a good card though I would suggest you dont get the asus version, too loud.

There are a lot of ati fanboys around so its hard to get straight info sometimes. For one thing I doubt benchmarkers turn off physX when making the benches; thats gonna be a 10-15 frame hit at least.

Ati fanboys love their graphs and hunting down every last frame, but I doubt if my eyes would be able to detect a 60-73 frame difference. Sure in two-three years when that becomes a 40-60 difference but by then I'll want a new toy Right now I need extra features.

Thtas my point ,at the end of the day when we are sitting infront of our screens actually playing the games you will not notice any diference in those cards.
I must say the physx in borderlands 2 is outstanding,totally transforms the games which feature it.
That feature alone is so damn tempting when buying a card.
If that person does go with a 660ti id suggest the MSI twin frozr, im using it and it whisper quiet.

Anyone played this on the 7870? If so, how does it run for you?

Not sure of that card but my brother is playing it fine on a 5970.

marco_polo

D4RK ONION wrote: »

Anyone played this on the 7870? If so, how does it run for you?

Overclocked HD7850 1920X1080, can get pretty close to a solid 55-60 FPS with 0XMSAA, HDAO, and everythng at max except for Post FX and Shadows which I have paired back one notch
Although I am playing with MSAA X2 which drops me back to 45-50 on average in outside areas which I'm happy enough with.

Andy!! wrote: »

According to the FC3 benched anyway And AC sure looks purdy with all the physX, playing it now. Its a good card though I would suggest you dont get the asus version, too loud.

There are a lot of ati fanboys around so its hard to get straight info sometimes. For one thing I doubt benchmarkers turn off physX when making the benches; thats gonna be a 10-15 frame hit at least.

Ati fanboys love their graphs and hunting down every last frame, but I doubt if my eyes would be able to detect a 60-73 frame difference. Sure in two-three years when that becomes a 40-60 difference but by then I'll want a new toy Right now I need extra features.

Do kindly knock it off with the fanboy s*** Andy, this is a great forum with loads of knowledgeble and helpful posters, and I haven't see that god awful word used here in years.

Andy!!

Sorry, I'll just call them 'people with extreme bias' in future. Didn't know that word had been elevated to 'n-word' status.

EDIT: I just re-read this page and I'm the third person to use that word on this page alone (havent seen it in years? Lol), can I ask why you're singling me out?

OmegaRed

So got my brand new 7970 royalQueen today and in true style with me and PC parts, i seem to be having issues.

Card is installed and working fine. Running latest 12-10 drivers. the FPS is stable but really low compared to what most people with good cards are getting.

The intro is running at 30fps but as soon as the game starts i'm into 15 to 20fps.

Pictures below with settings. I am running the game from the Uplay games launcher. Trying to run the farcry3_d3d11.exe from the far cry folder just launchers the uplay launcher again

Any suggestions what might be wrong here? I thought this card would be great an be running the game at a steady 50 to 60fps.... :(

Headshot

Turn off MSAA

marco_polo

There are Beta 12.11 drivers out now, give them a whirl. Also the highest i'd go is 4xMSAA

tuxy

Dcully manages 60 fps with msaa x8 on a single 660 ti. I still can't figure it out, it should not be possible with that card.

Dcully

tuxy wrote: »

Dcully manages 60 fps with msaa x8 on a single 660 ti. I still can't figure it out, it should not be possible with that card.

No mate not in dx 11 i said this already somewhere in one of the threads
I get 80-150 approx in dx 9 with or without msaax8
I get 60-120 approx in dx 11 without aa, aa in dx 11 cripples me.
2x aa isnt too bad but anything more kills things.
The dx 11 screenies i posted were no aa and 2x.

tuxy

Sorry I missed that. That brings it more into line with what I would expect.

OmegaRed

sweet - Turned off MSAA and i'm getting 50 to 60fps, looks smoth as butter. Gonna install the beta drivers now. Just looking at the patch notes:

Improves performance in Far Cry 3 (up to 25% with 8xMSAA, SSAO enabled @ 1600p, and up to 15% with 8xMSAA, HDAO enabled @1600p) (AMD Catalyst 12.11 CAP2 must also be installed)

Hopefully its provides some additional improvements

tuxy

You might be able to do x2 or x4 with out much of a hit to performance.

Tipsy McSwagger

I'm only getting an average of 35 FPS using very high settings. My specs are,

RAM : 8GB
MoBo: ASRock H61M/U3S3
CPU: Intel Core i3 2120 3.30ghz
GPU: Radeon HD7700
OS: Windows 7 64bit

Also have an 120gb SSD but the game is not installed on it.