Cod4 with 3070x2 - should i be more satisfied with results?

ok, heres the deal. According to benchmarks around the www, the 3870x2 is suppose to get an average of 70+ fps in cod4 @ 1600x1050 with everything set to max.

That means AA, AF, All hiigh, basically the works. When I play the game, sometimes fps will go up to 95 but then it can dip to 28fps! i mean 28fps! wth. Anything below 50fps I can feel and it often dips to 50 or lower. am I expecting too much? does the bar for AF pushed too far to the right?

I can set to 2xAA but I mean I just paid $500+ for a video card and I should be able to rock this game np.

Sli'd 8800GT's in a 939 rig

hmm. you really think the x2 6400 is limiting? i mean it performs on par with the E6750 or so. Cod4 specifically does not utilize quad cores yet so that cant be a factor. I am running win xp sp2 with 2gb of ram which I think should be enough.

looking back, i remember when i had my athlon 700 with 256mb ram and a radeon 7200 (original), i was getting good fps in quake3 but the problem was it kept dipping low. I solved it buy adding another 512mb stick to the system.

But i really doubt an extra 2gb will solve my problem with fps dipping. Win xp only reconizes 3gb so having 4gb would be a bit of a waste. I refuse to upgrade to vista. I would consider it if it was free but otherwise i cant justfiy paying $$$ for that os. I wouldnt even buy it for $20.

Not fanboyism mate, although I do have a preference to nVidia cards over Ati's. And as both companies been equally guilty over the years of 'fixing' drivers to gain a few more points in futuremark and other benchmarks, I was merely out to show that either COD4 is an nVidia title or the OP should question whether or not their card is any good as 95fps can be achieved with a single card that has a single GPU.

It sounds like a problem other than your hardware. You definately have the horsepower to run that game, try different drivers?

Hmmm mousemonkey I think something is being reported wrong if it says 200fps

One time fraps told me Assassins Creed was running at 150 fps but next time I ran the game it said it was 40-60 so I think it is reporting it to you wrong.

But maybe you have some futuristic technology we dont know about? Just givin you a hard time.

i will definately rull out the issue if it is memory related. luckily, my friend has the same 2 sticks of ballistix ddr800 and i will pop that in my pc. so basically, instead of 2gb ram it will be 3gb since winxp doesnt reconize 4gb. i wish microsoft can fix that crap. they are well aware that MB can support over 3gb so why limit it to 3? lame. just another excuse for us to buy vista.

Maybe so, but not on this occassion

Then put your hand in your pocket and shell out some dollars for a better card or cards

Eye candy is subjective. Settings are not. I also doubt that your X2 3800+ is not holding you back.

Tom's reports that CoD4 at 1680 x 1050 gets 59.2 fps, but 45.3 with 4x AA and 8x AF. I can't see you getting 200 fps unless your eyes are accustomed to candy that's more or less 800 x 600 with low res textures.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/0 [...] age15.html

Yes, a single GPU 8800gtx Ultra wins in this game. The 3870x2 wins in others. That's the way it goes. Overall, the differences are minor, especially when the price is considered.

I noticed that with the first drivers I used, the 8.2 Catalyst, but it's less of an issue with 8.3. Still, the biggest dips I get is in LOTR online, but there are both Crossfire and SLI issues with that game, even though it's one of Nvidia's "The Way It's Meant to Be Paid" program.

Okay, you have an Nvidia motherboard. Do you have bios issues that affect the 3870x2? When I had an MSI Nvidia 405 chipset board, the MSI documentation said the chipset did not support ATI X300 to X700 cards, and their customer support said that it did not support the X1000 series either, so I went 7600gs on that board. I switched to a cheap ATI board to hold me over so I could use this card.

Does your motherboard have limitations like the MSI K9N6SGM-V :

http://www.msicomputer.com/product [...] V&class=mb

If it doesn't have "chipset limitations", and if it's SLI, then could Nvidia specific settings in the bios be mucking things up with an ATI card? The opposite problem has occurred too. Here's a thread here at Tom's with virtually identical issues:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] nce-issues

I am guessing that, aside from old drivers wrecking havoc, that there need to be bios tweaks that allow an ATI card to work on an Nvidia motherboard without issues, and vice versa. The MSI tech people said "use Nvidia with Nvidia" and that's good advice, which is why I use ATI with ATI.

How is CCC bad? I didn't find Nvidia's interface all that better the year I had the 7600gs. If you went 3870x2 after years of Nvidia, perhaps it's just what you were used to? Why don't you sell it and get a 9800gx2 when it arrives? I'm sure you'll have fun with that monstrosity.

http://www.nordichardware.com/inde [...] re&id=7501

Your CPU is not holding you back. A high end GPU + any dual core cpu is more than good enough for any game. You don't need mega quad core OC'd to hell to play games at max/high resolution (except maybe FSX and Supreme Commander).

Here's an important point though, make sure you have Catalyst AI enabled, because if it's not only one GPU on the card is going to be doing the work. Also turn off V-sync if you have it on! V-sync with the X2 doesn't work well for me in COD4 or ET:QW, but I can play both with highest AA and AF maxed at 1680x1050. Hope this helps.

how are you able to play a game that hasn't even been released yet? (if you say beta tester, can u hook me a copy of that game? )

No, you should not be satisfied with the results. Its not your CPU, and its not you ram.

With the rig in my sig, I never dip below 50fps, with all settings maxed, 1680 x 1050, in an online game with 20+ players.

Something is up my friend.

Id suggest checking your running processes and look for a program running in the back ground that may be sapping performance. Also, make sure you have the AMD Dual-Core Optimizer, which if you google search, is easy to get. Also, make sure Vista is updated.

Instead of getting into an debate with other people, I will be happy to solve the problem at hand.

I have a 3870x2 with the 8.2 drivers, and CoD4 almost never dips below 50 fps in multiplayer. And that's in heavy foliage or smoke at 1920x1200 with everything maxed (except soft smoke edges) with moderate AA and AF (full AA and AF makes things look blurry to me). Something's up on your machine.

(Processor is an A64 X2 6400+, not OCed, running XP with 2 gig of RAM).

Vsync is off. I have to check about the catalyst AI when I get home from work.

I dont have anything running the BG because I just formatted the pc just for the sake of cod4.

my cooling is more than adequate. I have a coolermaster 212 with dual fans and a couple of system fans.

I am currently using 8.2 instead of 8.3 because I find it being much faster (3dmark06 definately confirms this).

1. Do you guys click on (dual GPU) in the cod4 settings?
2. I do have filters set to trilinear, with everything on extra. The AF bar is push all the way to the right (maximum).
3. I am running win XP Sp2, not vista.
4. My motherboard is not Nforce\SLI, its 690g board by asus. So there are no nvidia related parts in it. Bios is updated.
5. AMD dual core optimizer is also installed.

Well by the time catalyst 8.6 is released, it will be in the fall. Thats a bit long of a wait i think. I hope 8.4 will do wonders.

I don't doubt he has a better rig than mine. I just doubt his fps. That might be the max he gets, but I doubt it stays at the max for long. As you said, 200fps is indoors. Sort of like dungeon Oblivion vs. outdoor Oblivion with HDR and a gate spawning four or more Daedra.

Since I don't play COD, I can't say, but even with 8800gtx's in SLI, I have my doubts at the resolution he plays at. When proof is offered, then my doubts will be over.

^ that's the funniest post I've read today

Yes, I know, I need to read more posts...

Quanger, I do select dual gpu settings in COD4, I even did it in COD2 when I used an x800xl and a 6800gt because I heard it helped FPS ieven if you didn't have dual gpu setup.

Sounds fine to me.
My SLi'd GTXs (which should in fairness whip your 3870X2 )give upto about 325fps in CoD4, full everything @ 1280x1024, but occasionally it'll drop to 40-50fps in intensive scenes (heavy smoke with explosions all going on at the same time etc.) but probably averaging around 100-140FPS.

Ha ha, thanks!
It's taken me a long time to get it (my system) to where it is now and I'm just waiting for a nice quick Phenom B3 and then I'm going to lock the case up and leave it alone (for once!)
I'm ridiculously CPU-limited though as in 3DMark the 2nd GTX doesn't even ramp it's fan up! So next purchase will be a 24"!
Your GTs are more than enough though!

Cheers mate, and yes you really do need a 24" at the very least, I'm using a 22" Samsung that I found on the clearance shelf in PC World of all places for £224, USB hub, speakers, web camera & mics and most importantly a DVI socket and as 1680x1050 seems to be the sweet spot for the 512 GT's I took the one box that was still sealed and headed for the checkout . Your GTX's I would think, will perform best at 1900x1200 which is 24" territory and quite a leap up in price here in rip-off Blighty as you well know, so I don't envy you on your quest.

@ OP, have you tried enabling the 'dual GPU' option yet? and if so what happened?

Ooohhh , Actually the OP was asking whether he/she should be satisfied with the performance of a $500 dollar card in but one game. And in the 'Graphic Cards' section not the 'Ati' sub section.

well i have 2 saphire 3870X2 and with crossfire turned off i just checked on a 27 in screen i dont go lower then 117 with it all maxed...... im runing vista, 2 gig ddr3 at 1800 mhz 9650 at 3.5 8.3 drivers.

yay i solved my problem. basically did reformatted my whole pc and started from scratch. I am using the 8.2 because the 8.3 is brutal.

ypsl>>i had a lot of problems getting catalyst to work previously. Everytime i tried to run it, it would give me an error pop up and then close. I hated it dearly.

My cpu\video card is not o/c'd. I get about 12500 with 3dmark06. THe fps is much better now, it will dip but not as low and not as often. And i do have dual-GPU selected in cod4. Maybe its time to buy another 3870x2.

Yeah, it's a shame there isn't a benchmark built in for that like (like the Crysis one) as it would be great to compare cards in the 'real world', not in 3DMark's! As my system proves, my 3DMark is relatively poor for what I have, but in game you'd never know!
With regard to my FPS. While I was playing last night the lowest recorded FPS was during the nuclear explosion with all the 'copters dropping out of the sky etc. I went down to 48FPS, average was more than I thought at about 130-160 and edging upto 200 fairly frequently and upto 300 not very often at all! In the loading screens though (during the vid) I get upto 700FPS, does that count?
I would be really interested to see how the 3870X2 performs in comparison

wow I play 1900x1200 with max everything and it never dips below 46 fps with an average of 59. the a gts 512 that is.