Prototype Performance Analyzed

Conclusion

What has our Prototype performance analysis taught us? First and foremost, we learned that this title values CPU speed and architecture over graphics prowess. Based on our testing, a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Quad performed less than half as fast as a Core i7 at 2.66 GHz. This means that, for playable performance, the Core i7 CPU is an ideal companion to Prototype, but if you're planning to play it on something different, you should target a quad-core Core 2 Quad or Phenom II in the 2.5 GHz or faster range. A dual-core Core 2 Duo or Phenom II-based CPU might do the trick, but you'd ideally want something in the neighborhood of 3 GHz.

Because this game title is so CPU-dependent, the graphics subsystem doesn't have the pronounced effect on performance we've come to expect. The silver lining is that even a GeForce 9600 GT or Radeon HD 4830 will deliver great performance compared to more expensive solutions. When AA is applied, you might prefer a Radeon graphics card for resolutions of 1920x1200 or higher. But below that, most GeForce cards performed very smoothly as well.

We were a little surprised to see such a high CPU dependency, but frankly we don't benchmark a lot of sandbox-style games, so perhaps this is par for the course. In the meantime, we'll be exploring Alex Mercer's Manhattan, trying to find out exactly what it was that turned him into such a powerful badass.

  • Wayoffbase
    I don't see anyone upgrading from a C2Q to an i7 for a game that's just not all that great looking on high settings, the performance discrepency there was odd. The gameplay itself looks like it might be interesting though.
    Reply
  • Ramar
    Already beat the game a week ago, but it was a thrill-ride. Not sure why the article's so late getting up though.

    At the least, it'll convince people that their older rigs -can- run it. It's basically an optimized and mostly un-buggy Web Of Shadows engine; I'd expect a 7800GT could probably run it okay.
    Reply
  • Ramar
    Wayoffbase...just not all that great looking on high settings,...
    In action it's much better than these screenshots. It pulls a lot of the same tricks MGS4 does on the PS3, where you can tell it's not actually doing that much processing but it looks like it is. Screenshots don't do the game justice because you rarely see a texture or polygon for more than a few seconds at most; in action the particle effects are actually pretty impressive.

    Reply
  • apache_lives
    could this be the first game that takes full advantage of an i7's 8 threads?
    Reply
  • mcbowler
    Hmm.. all its takes is an XBOX 360! $200.00 It is a great game.
    Reply
  • neiroatopelcc
    What happends if you add 8gb ddr2-1200 (ballistix or similar) to the old quadcore ? the i7 had 50% more memory available as well after all - if the game's 64 bit enabled, perhaps the difference isn't the cpu alone - since even at 2.4 the difference is huge.
    Even saints row, which has shit for graphics, runs close to the 2gb memory limit of 32bit games all the time - so perhaps this actually uses whatever is available?

    I saw this game a few weeks ago running great on a laptop that usually does inventor stuff ... I don't know what processor was in it, but I bet no more than an old dualcore T something processor
    Reply
  • radium69
    My Q6600 @ 3.0 Ghz and Geforce GTS 512 runs this game flawless on high settings. I've tried with aa on 4x but found it runnign at 20fps sometimes. It's a fun game. And not to hard on resources.
    Reply
  • Tknockers
    http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,688240/Prototype-CPU-Benchmarks-System-Requirements-and-Screenshots/Practice/
    Reply
  • Tknockers
    p.s. not so great difference between i7 and core2quad on that site..
    Reply
  • chovav
    my Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz and 8800GT 512mb run the game smoothly at 1980x1080 with anti-aliasing x4 and high details.. I actually don't mind the graphics so much, i think they are better than GTAIV's..

    One of the best games ever BTW!!
    Reply