also @ TechSpot: HP TouchPad running Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich
Welcome to the TechSpot OpenBoards. Please read the FAQ if you have any questions. Sign up or Login to participate.

Go Back   TechSpot OpenBoards > TechSpot Editorial and Site Feedback > Articles and Reviews Comments

Collaborate in the cloud with Office, Exchange, SharePoint, and Lync

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Graphics Performance

Reply
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 11-11-2009
Julio's Avatar
TechSpot Executive Editor
 
Location: Ecuador
Member since: Feb 2002, 5,355 posts
System specs
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Graphics Performance

We expect Modern Warfare 2 to be just as hardware friendly as its predecessor despite the numerous engine enhancements. In our graphics card performance evaluation we'll be testing a large range of previous and current generation GPUs, both mainstream and high-end chips from the GeForce 9600GT and Radeon 3000 series, to the recently launched Radeon HD 5000 GPUs, dual GPU cards from Nvidia and ATI, and even a Radeon HD 5770 Crossfire setup to make up for a total of 19 different GPU configurations.

Read the full article at:
http://www.techspot.com/article/219-...u-performance/

Please leave your feedback here.
  #2  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
Here's a nice video of Modern Warfare 2 on, gtx 295 , i7 920

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4t0XmrgWi0
  #3  
Old 11-11-2009
Puiu's Avatar
TechSpot Addict
 
Location: Romania
Member since: Oct 2009, 664 posts
System specs
I never expected such low requirements for a game that looks so good. and has so much action. This goes to show that if you put a bit of effort into it you can get outstanding results. (unlike a certain crysis)
  #4  
Old 11-11-2009
TechSpot Paladin
 
Location: Chile, South America
Member since: Nov 2009, 724 posts
Too bad you left the Ati XT2600HD out =(

I'm still in love of that video card hehe
  #5  
Old 11-11-2009
TechSpot Paladin
 
Location: Chile, South America
Member since: Nov 2009, 724 posts
I'm wondering, would you make a comparison just for gigs of the old video cards vs the new ones? =)
  #6  
Old 11-11-2009
Burty117's Avatar
TechSpot Chancellor
 
Location: High Wycombe, England
Member since: Feb 2009, 1,445 posts
System specs
I wonder how the 8800GTS handles this?i know soo many people who still use that card, I personally own a GTX260 and I love it! extremely good card considering I got it less than hundred pounds. Nice to see it have a special mention here as its relatively cheap considering the performance of the card.
  #7  
Old 11-11-2009
Puiu's Avatar
TechSpot Addict
 
Location: Romania
Member since: Oct 2009, 664 posts
System specs
Quote:
burty117 said:
I wonder how the 8800GTS handles this?i know soo many people who still use that card, I personally own a GTX260 and I love it! extremely good card considering I got it less than hundred pounds. Nice to see it have a special mention here as its relatively cheap considering the performance of the card.
8800GTS is above 9600GT and below 9800GTX. it should work just fine with this game at the resolutions that 9600 worked.
  #8  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
What a FAIL benchmark.

What's the point of doing graphics test when you are running a Core i7 965 @ 3,7Ghz?

Seriously it would be better to run the tests with a E8400 or maybe and i7 920.
  #9  
Old 11-11-2009
Ranger12's Avatar
TechSpot Enthusiast
 
Location: Atlanta, GA
Member since: Apr 2009, 205 posts
System specs
Quote:
Guest said:
What a FAIL benchmark.

What's the point of doing graphics test when you are running a Core i7 965 @ 3,7Ghz?

Seriously it would be better to run the tests with a E8400 or maybe and i7 920.
Benchmarking with the i7 965 makes perfect sense. Theyre benchmarking videocards here not whole systems. They gotta make sure it's the videocards that are bottlenecking the system not the CPU.
  #10  
Old 11-11-2009
TechSpot Paladin
 
Location: Chile, South America
Member since: Nov 2009, 724 posts
I still play the most recent games and some on maximum quality (But low AA filtering) on an ATI 256 mb DDR3 HD2600XT, AMD Athlon x64 5000+ and 2x twin corsairs 1gb ram 667mhz (Which is to be a 2 year old system).

With an ATI Radeon HD2600XT 256 mb DDR3, Windows 7 gives my 3D rendering a 6,4 in the windows experience evaluation, what is your score on which video card?
  #11  
Old 11-11-2009
Nirkon's Avatar
TechSpot Enthusiast
 
Location: Around the net
Member since: Aug 2007, 232 posts
Quote:
Guest said:
What a FAIL benchmark.

What's the point of doing graphics test when you are running a Core i7 965 @ 3,7Ghz?

Seriously it would be better to run the tests with a E8400 or maybe and i7 920.
That's how ALL the sites do their benchmarking...

but yeah I somewhat agree that the benchmark should be more about the whole PC and not about JUST the GPUs.
I have an HD4850 and a 22" (1680x1050) so here it runs with 4X AA at 60FPS but with 6GB DDR3 and Core I7 at 3.7GHZ... so I'm thinking.. how the heck is it going to run anywhere near that with an E6600 and 2GB DDR2???

But you know what, I'm gonna benchmark it and post it here afterwords for anyone interested.
I usually play with 8XAA though, and generally, a 30FPS average is good enough for me.
  #12  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
Hello ! Nvidia 7600 is ok ? What do you think ?
  #13  
Old 11-11-2009
Burty117's Avatar
TechSpot Chancellor
 
Location: High Wycombe, England
Member since: Feb 2009, 1,445 posts
System specs
hey hey! I used to use the 7600! its impressive for its size and age i'll give ya that! and yes, it won't run it in full res without lag and you will need to keep anti-alising off but appart from that, you could run it happily
  #14  
Old 11-11-2009
SNGX1275's Avatar
TechSpot Forces Special
 
Location: Rolla, Missouri, USA
Member since: Feb 2002, 10,815 posts
System specs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
What a FAIL benchmark.

What's the point of doing graphics test when you are running a Core i7 965 @ 3,7Ghz?

Seriously it would be better to run the tests with a E8400 or maybe and i7 920.
No. Having system specs really high is the best way to guarantee you are card limited in performance and not system limited. Since this is benchmarking the video cards with this game it is the ideal way to do it.
  #15  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
Am I the only one that doesn't understand why they benchmarked an entire set of dx10 cards in dx9??
  #16  
Old 11-11-2009
camuss15's Avatar
TechSpot Member
 
Location: Tennessee
Member since: Jun 2007, 47 posts
System specs
I must have low standards, but I have a 22' monitor running at 1680x1050 with a 9600GT, and I think that 45 fps at max settings with 4xx AA on a game that came out this week is damn good... For a sub $100 video card.

I know that I am probably going to average like 25-30 fps with my E4300 and 2 gigs of ram though...
  #17  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
Is that gtx260 the 216 or 192 cores version? Or is the difference between them negligible?
  #18  
Old 11-11-2009
TechSpot Paladin
 
Location: England, UK
Member since: Feb 2003, 502 posts
System specs
All the benchmark charts for AA/AF enabled show AA at 4x and AF at zero which is a bit confusing - did you test with anisotropic filtering off but antialiasing on full?
  #19  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
i'm using 5870, i benchmarked the game in Windows XP and Windows 7 64 bit, the result was that i got at least 25% more frames in Xp than in 7, ATI should work on that in their next driver.
  #20  
Old 11-11-2009
Guest
 
I say again, why no dx10 benchies???
Reply
Page 1 of 3 1 23

Similar Topics
Topic Replies Forum
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Xbox 360 $45 1 Hot Deals
Call of duty Modern Warfare 2/Steam 1 Gaming
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 & other games - PC or PS3 3 Gaming
Call of Duty: modern warfare 2 for PC or PS3 27 Gaming
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 2 Gaming

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 PM.