AMD Gamers Please Post Your Benchmarks!!

I've am about to order my parts for a new build I am making in a matter of days. I am going to be using an intel processor (E8400 wolfdale)in it... but I don't know if I really need it. Does the processor matter at high resolutions? I can't find any benchmarks that address that (if any of you could I would appreciate it if you would post them). They all use old games at low resolution to measure performance, but this isn't a real world test. I want to know what the difference is at high resolutions with AA. Most people don't just let there games run at 150 framerates, they increase some aspect of the graphics to use that extra horse power.

Ok AMD fans, obviously your processors aren't as good as intels core2duo (don't take it personally). However, I want to know "does it matter"? Please post your rig specs, in particular specifying your cpu clock speed, model, and gpu along side your framerates in difficult to run games like crysis, Unreal tournament 3, flight simulator X, ect. It would help me make a final decision before I blow my wad on something I may or may not need as intel performance is great, but price is not.

Thanks in advance for all who participate and are good sports
8 answers Last reply
More about gamers post benchmarks
  1. Actually the E8400 is a great cpu for gaming as most of the latest games barely make use of 2 cores anyway ... and the IPC of the 8400 is very high due to the large cache and high frequency and FSB.

    I recommend you look at the 4870 or 4870X2 graphics cards as great value for money for a gaming build, though the latest NV top end card is also excellent ... though not so good for the price.

    Make sure you buy a good case and at least a 550W PSU and at least 2Ghz (4 would be better) of ram.

    I have a Q6600 runnng at 3Ghz and that seems good enough with a 9600GT ... for me anyway.

    I can't post any stuff at present because my oldest son has nicked my card to play SLI (he has one too) ... mongrel left me a 7900GS instead.

    I won't post anything with that card for fear of humiliation ...

    A stock E8400 vs a Q6600 (clocked @ 3Ghz) would still have a slightly higher IPC for single threaded apps ( Wolfy vs Kenty).

    I wouldn't build an AMD gaming rig for myself ( unless I used a 6400+ with two 4870's in CF) ... too much hassle overclocking the Phenom's ... I imagine they will be better @45nm though.

    Before someone rates me down please be aware I am an AMD fan too !!
  2. You can find various review on the internet...

    I won't post any scores too... 690G doesn't cut as being fast.
  3. x2 5600+ 2.8GHZ with 690G + 2GB ram
    9600GT OC 670/1945/1900

    crysis: 25fps avg ....... 1200x800 resolution + high settings
    no flight sim
    no ut3
    grid 45-60 fps (max setting with 16xAA)
    mass effect 45-55 fps (max setting with 16xAA)
    nfs-pro street: 45-50fps (max setting with 16xAA)
    vagas 2: 45-50fps (max setting with 16xAA)
    portal: 80-130fps (max setting with 16xAA)

    2.8 sumtimes hit cpu bottleneck at ma native 1440x900....
    but i believe 3.2 GHZ will be fine...or a 2.6GHz phenom
  4. (FSX)

    In short, I wouldn't buy an X2 for a gaming rig right now. Its showing its age a bit and bottlenecks many of the latest games. Phenoms are OK, especially when overclocked to 3GHz+. If you plan to play FSX I'd definitely recommend a quad core, its one of the few games that can take advantage of all 4 cores.
  5. i should note that the higher resolution u go to, the less likely u will be hitting cpu bottleneck.........
  6. mothergoose said:
    Excellent, exactly what I was looking for. +1

    I don't usually do this but,

    Those are with a 9600GT

    These are with a 9950.

    Here you can see that the games scale very well with the same CPU and faster video card. The first test shows that CPU doesn't matter as much above 2.3GHz.
  7. amdfangirl said:
    You can find various review on the internet...

    I won't post any scores too... 690G doesn't cut as being fast.

    I could take a cop-out and say that since I am running Linux, my scores in multi-platform games like Enemy Territory:Quake Wars aren't really comparable. That is true, but the real fact is that my hardware is three years old (socket 939 X2 4200+, Radeon x1900GT). It would be about as relevant to the discussion of new AMD vs. Intel parts as somebody benchmarking a Pentium D 805.

    But if you really want to know, at 1600x1200 with no AA and normal details, my unit averages about 35 FPS and ranges between 25 and 45 FPS. It's playable.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Product