Pretty good article. At first glance, the 5830, performed pretty well. Right in the middle of the 5850/ 5770. A 512 4770 can game almost as well as a 5750 up to 1680x1050. Anything above that needs 1gig of memory. All my opinions from glancing at the numbers. I couldn't see much of a difference between high and medium, but no one would want to game at low it looks like.
Yup, it looks like my system is not good enough...
4850~512 ? What resolution are you playing at ? 1920x? If your like me, 1680 and a 4770, I can play fine, I also played the demo. Its similar to AvP stays above 43 it seems almost everywhere. I run my4770 20% O/C.
DICE (Digital Illusions CE) is said to be working on the Frostbite 2 engine at the moment. This upcoming engine will carry native support for DirectX 10.1 and DirectX 11, as well as parallelized processing supporting 2-8 parallel threads, allowing it to use the full capacity of a Core i7 processor, for example. The Frostbite 1.5 engine used on Battlefield: Bad Company 2, on the other hand, is mostly DirectX 10 based with a few additions catered to DX11 users, namely softened dynamic shadows and presumed performance improvements. A cut-down rendering version that only uses DX9 is also included, so Windows XP users can still enjoy the game.
Yes, I read that. It also doesn't mention it afterward or say which mode the testing presented is using or even if the graphical quality comparison screen shots are DX10 or DX11.
Why are they saying "presumed" performance improvements then not test whether or not they exist in an article specifically devoted to how the game performs?
After you install game , you can see dll files labeled dx9,dx10,dx11. With one game.exe .
In game with msi/riva fps tool running, it shows the game as being dx10 , on my win 7/64 system with ati 4770. In this games case its not dx9~11 , its 9, 10 , or 11 .
I know that was basically said in that quote above, so the question is , which version is the best looking ? or do they all look the same !