Whats your FFXIV Benchmark score?

I'll test that right now.

I read somewhere that because the test is in windowed mode, it defaults to GPU 1.

Low settings is more dependent on CPU whereas high setting utilizes the GPU.

I don't think you can...the alpha also runs in a window

High: 4514
Low: 4775
Load Time both: 18000

WIN 7 64bit
Q6600 @ 3,4Ghz
4 GB RAM
Radeon HD 5870 , fully overclocked (ATI Overdrive)

Low: 749
High: didn't even bother

Windows 7 -64 bit
Intel Core i5-430M 2.26GHz Turbo Boost 2.53GHz
NVidia GT325M 1GB DDR3 VRAM (read below)
4GB of DDR3 1066MHz SDRAM

Unfortunately, it only wants to read my Integrated Graphics card, thanks to my Optimus technology. Which I think is the reason for my low score. I can’t seem to get it to read my GT325… I've gone to the nVidia control panel, but that didn't help. Annoyance.

i want to see some one with a 480 do it iv seen all over youtube and forums ppl with 5870s but no 480s

With an AMD dual-core 5600+ 2.8GHz processor, 4GB RAM, and an Nvidia GTX275 GPU, I got a low resolution score of 2242 and a high resolution score of 2232. The benchmark won't run on my ASUS G73jh-A1 with the i-7 720 with 8GB RAM and ATI 5870 GPU even after updating the DX files to get the missing DX9 .dll file.

low: 5790... specs in sig, I really wonder what a 5970 would do (dual GPU) or a GTX 480 if possible

y do you think its flawed? because of what it takes to get a high score?? square enix already stated that it will take a preaty dam good computer to run it. its not wow where a 10 year old single core proccesor computer could run it.

Did you see my previous posts? A difference of 10 between high and low quality is very suspicious at the least. If the requirements are as high as the benchmark suggests, who's going to play it? And how old are you anyway? Your argument is weak, and you can't spell "pretty" and "damn".

The lower resolution is more CPU dependent.

A high score of 4000 on low and 4000 on high means the system is pretty balanced top end. A quick CPU at lower range that fully opens up the GPU and a hardy enough GPU on the high run to not falter to the higher textures.

A high score of 2000 on the low and 2000 on the high shows signs of a graphics card bottlenecked by its CPU. The cpu can only drive the gpu so hard. Again, running it on high quality and seeing a similar score is further proof that the GPU can only compensate so much.

Take my run, 4300 low, 2900 high. My E8400 at 4.0Ghz is tapping out my GTX285. IF I were to slap in a GTX470 Im sure you'd see my low end score pretty much stay the same, while the high quality run would be much higher.

Hope that helps understanding.

Anyway to see your score in High when your resolution is so low that almost half the benchmark is out of your monitor's viewing range?

I tried to drag the window up to view the score at the bottom corner, but I couldn't find a way to do that.

low: 2950

e5400 @ 3.25 ghz
2 GB ddr2
gts 250 palit e-green (same speed/performance of a 9800 gtx)
xp pro SP3

hopefully ill get a Q9400 before ff14 is out

hmmm, can't even bench my desktop until Friday as i am away from home

snip

While this maybe true, but you would also have to consider Water Cooling. I'm running my GTX 480 on stock fan at the moment. However, I do plan on getting Water Block for it later just a bit low on $$ lol. You and I both know that only with Water Cooling that we can get best OC out of.

Also, Dual GPUs VS Single GPU so to be fair GTX 480 would have to be in SLI. I know that FFXIV Benchmark only using a Single GPU. But who knows maybe the final version of the game might support SLI/CF.

To: Houdinii, 5970 might be good too. But also take into consideration about the video drivers between ATI and Nvidia. Do a little more research on what will work best for you. FYI I'm not a fanboy of either Nvidia or ATI. I'm just another gamers like you guys.

The 8800GTX Superclocked finally gave up after a few years of used. The good thing is that EVGA offers life-time warranty. Since they're no longer in production I'm not sure what card I'll be getting as a replacement. But they told me that it would be the same value or better at least. The card itself was $600+ back in the days lol so I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a good replacement.

interesting i replaced my 5770 with a 5830 and got

High: 3001
Low: 5291

temps are good, haven't seen my 5850 go over 39C and its got a Core i7 920 @4Ghz in the same loop.

Nice bump in score BTW.

I used this to try a few things, current system:
Phenom II 940 black running stock at 3 ghz
8 Gigs 800 mhz ddr2 ram
nothing special about the hard drive
Two 5770's in Xfire

High 2200 or so
Low 4600 or so (Fluctuation of 30 or so'ish points for both)

OC'd the 940 to 3.6 (Most I can keep it stable at with this ram)

High 2500'ish
Load times from 17000-18000 each

Didn't test Low because Low was more than fine.

This to me shows that it's likely A) Most definatly not utilizing SLI, and B) As an Nvidia optimized game it's like the shadows that hit us the hardest (Same thing in EverQuest 2 really which is a horribly optimized game).

I -may- have to go and build a new system for this, go to an I-7 930 and a 480 since if it doesn't use SLI at all... even at release... well.

actually the 5870 would score higher due to the 5970 being 2 5870's that are slightly down clocked

kleintrpt,

I have an older system with the same CPU. What kind of cooling do you use? The reason I'm asking because I think that you can upped the CPU to 3.5Ghz+ with a fairly cheap cooling.

I gave the old rig to my brother and slapped on Corsair H50 ($60ish after discount) and at 3.5Ghz~ the temp idel at 36C +-2C. Before that I can only run it around 2.6~8Ghz. Maybe that will help you get a little more juice out of your CPU

Lol blckhaze,

I guess you don't need SSD. The lowest that I've seen on my SSD is almost 10000 flat.

But I'm getting a new result on low setting. Playing around with GTX 480 settings. Core Clock for Trial #3 @805. Going to need Water Cooling if I'm going to push it 900+.

Trail #1.
High: 4,244 @1920x1080 | Load Time:10781
Low: 6,250 @1280x720 | Load Time:10808

Trial #2.
High: 4,707 @1920x1080 | Load Time:10446
Low: 6,822 @1280x720 | Load Time:10979

Trial #3.
High: 4,696 @1920x1080 | Load Time:10425 went down a little orz...
Low: 6,976 @1280x720 | Load Time:10580 7K almost there!!! lol

Oh and as a side note, I was watching FPS and with that score they Average about 110 fps, min around 80, and max around 140.

the 8800GTS 320 model is pretty slow (as is the 640 model), it's the 8800GTS 512 model that is pretty fast (as it uses G92 instead of G80 core for more SP's)