Dead Space: Performance Analyzed

Features
By
published

Benchmark Results: Low Detail

Just so there's no ambiguity about this, I'm not advocating running this game at Low Detail. The flat, detail-deprived surfaces and poor lighting model at this level absolutely ruin the dark foreboding ambience and take away what makes this game special.

In addition, every card we tested was able to get very high frame rates at 1920 x 1200 with the Medium Detail setting, except with the most basic graphics card that we used for our tests, the Radeon HD 4650.

Just for reference, we benchmarked the Low Detail setting with the Radeon HD 4650 and compared it to the Medium Detail results:

Compared to the Medium Detail setting, the Low Detail setting looks like it lets us bump up from 1280x1024 to 1680x1050 and the minimum frame rate remains at about 30 frames per second (FPS). This sounds great, until you remember how it looks...

Given the choice, folks with slower graphics cards will probably want to opt for the lower resolution with Medium Detail enabled instead of a higher resolution at Low Detail.

The good news is that the next step up in our comparisons–the GeForce 9600 GT–will breeze through the Medium Detail setting at 1920x1200. Let's move on to the Medium Detail benchmarks.

Don Woligroski
44 Comments Comment from the forums
  • anamaniac
    "Mushkin PC3-10700
    3x 2,048 MB, DDR3-1066, CL 8-8-8-19
    at 1.8 V"

    This is a mistake, right?
    Reply
  • anamaniac
    Interesting article.

    Deadspace does seem like a decent game, but it was too much for me.
    Tried sitting down to play it a few times, but I just couldn't take it.

    And yeah, the game can play on some junk hardware.
    800x600 res, minimum settings.


    First time I saw one of those creatures, I just wasted ammo. WTF WAS THAT!?!?!
    Pentium D 2.8GHz, 1GB DDR2 533, Nvidia 7500LE 256MB.
    It played. Average framerate was bad, but the minimums were kinda bad, yet still possible.

    Nice to see what I may be able to crank it up to now with my 4670, though a couple gigs of ddr2 800 will be a nice bonus if I find the will to spend my rent money...
    Reply
  • Andraxxus
    It can play fairly well even on a E6300@1.86Ghz with 1GB DDR2 667 and Nvidia 7600GT but I never finished it.
    Reply
  • tacoslave
    im ashamed to say this but i jumped when one of those things came at me out of nowhere...
    Reply
  • axilon
    One of the few games that sucked me in. I do NOT recommend playing it at 3am, the dreams I had....
    Reply
  • microdots
    9600gt plays this game great
    awesome game regardless tho. everything is very well done, its easy to tell that the developers took great time in perfecting every portion in the levels and environment. as from what i remember it defiantly lived up to its hype. i still haven't beaten it either along with being super cool its also pretty difficult but totally worth the money; a true gaming experience.
    Reply
  • Ciuy
    so in the end AO = bad. Unless u got to much fps .
    Reply
  • Kill@dor
    I don't blame you for being scared to try this game out...its really something else ^_^ Very well made game in my opinion
    Reply
  • rags_20
    I was thinking of trying it. Is it really that scary? I mean, if you turn down the volume, it shouldn't be as scary.
    Reply
  • Roffey123
    It was the soundscape in the game that got me, I'm used to the monsters and such, but the ambience really got to me - so I never really got far. Perhaps I should summon the courage up for it again.
    Reply