New Final Fantasy XIV Benchmark Software
|
New Final Fantasy XIV Benchmark software
After I put in my character on either low or high resolution, the program stops working and then has to close after I click start.
I made a rough prediction back in October of last year...
Quote page Diabolos.Chupacabra said: Minimum Core 2 Duo 2.5GHz or above 2GB of RAM 30GB hdd ATI 4650 /Nvidia 8800 Broadband internet (a given) DVD-Rom drive (although we may see a blu-ray release) Now, I'm just guessing here, but the Recommended Settings will likely see something in the field of: Core i7 4GB of RAM 30GB HDD ATI 5850 /Nvidia 285 Edited!: Cause now that I look at it, that was pretty fuggin close. Psychic nerd powers activate! Form of... handbanana! LOL scored 2000. Guess i'm not gonna bother with ff14. My comp isn't crap, but i'm not building something huge to play a mmo.
ack... none of those res will fit on my moniter lol
1048 on high 3680 on low not so bad i guess... wish we could tweak the resolution and a few other things though c2d q6600 g0 evga 680i 4gb corsair xms2 evga gtx260 Mine is crashing after the first scene. When it first goes black, you hear a knock or footstep w/e then it stops working. Vista 64 bit..
2065
I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all.
[+]
Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: 2065 I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all. That is what i said ^^ A high-end pc @ this time should get a score of 7000+ Funny thing is the alpha version of FFXIV (which required higher specs) runs w/o problems and smooth (beside a little lag) and the benchmark wanna tell me i can't play the game lol why the hell is mine still so low...aside from processor, my comp is top notch ; ;
Leviathan.Dubont said: why the hell is mine still so low...aside from processor, my comp is top notch ; ; Wouldn't worry, this thing is bogus lol Cerberus.Dizzmal said: Mine is crashing after the first scene. When it first goes black, you hear a knock or footstep w/e then it stops working. Vista 64 bit.. Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: Leviathan.Dubont said: why the hell is mine still so low...aside from processor, my comp is top notch ; ; Wouldn't worry, this thing is bogus lol
[+]
Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: 2065 I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all. Bioshock uses a lowgrade engine. I have a Dual Core 2.0 Ghz(going to overclock at 3.0Ghz), 6 GB RAM and a ATI 4770, Windows 7. Download a program called Gameboost, which closes all the useless aplications, also the invisible windows aplications that don't show up on the task manager. Also upgrade your video card drivers, make sure they are up to date, don't just download and install over the old drivers, because that sometimes generates conflict, uninstall them first then run drive sweeper, reboot and install the new one. I was getting lower scores till I updated my drivers. ::EDIT::
Confirmed that the benchmark doesn't recognize/use multiple VPUs at least. Was tested using 1: single screen crossfire off, then 2: dual screen crossfire on. Returned with a minor score change, 20-30 points. Sylph.Belmonth said: Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: 2065 I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all. Bioshock uses a lowgrade engine. I have a Dual Core 2.0 Ghz(going to overclock at 3.0Ghz), 6 GB RAM and a ATI 4770, Windows 7. Download a program called Gameboost, which closes all the useless aplications, also the invisible windows aplications that don't show up on the task manager. Also upgrade your video card drivers, make sure they are up to date, don't just download and install over the old drivers, because that sometimes generates conflict, uninstall them first then run drive sweeper, reboot and install the new one. I was getting lower scores till I updated my drivers. ROFLMAO You're calling the unreal engine lowgrade, that's hilarious. Those are, however; good suggestions thanks. Diabolos.Chupacabra said: Phoenix.Oumura said: Just reailzed something. Particularly with new iCore setups Intel boasts the whole "Turbo Boost" deal with their new processors. For example my processors default is 1.6, but it can go as high as 2.67 if an application/process calls for more power. Just wondering if it could be affecting scores. http://www.intel.com/technology/turboboost/ Good thinking... I'm at work, but can anyone run task manager while running the benchie and see how many cores it is loading? That would give us a quick idea of whether or not Turbo Boost is kicking in. *Think that will work for the new T1000 series from AMD as well... Edit: would also let us see how multi threaded FFXIV is... I think photobucket messed with the photo sizes :( I hope these help :P     Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: Sylph.Belmonth said: Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: 2065 I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all. Bioshock uses a lowgrade engine. I have a Dual Core 2.0 Ghz(going to overclock at 3.0Ghz), 6 GB RAM and a ATI 4770, Windows 7. Download a program called Gameboost, which closes all the useless aplications, also the invisible windows aplications that don't show up on the task manager. Also upgrade your video card drivers, make sure they are up to date, don't just download and install over the old drivers, because that sometimes generates conflict, uninstall them first then run drive sweeper, reboot and install the new one. I was getting lower scores till I updated my drivers. ROFLMAO You're calling the unreal engine lowgrade, that's hilarious. Those are, however; good suggestions thanks. I mean lowgrade compared to others like Cry engine and such....... it's not very system demanding, any crap computer can run bioshock decently, as a matter of fact, any unreal engine game runs decent on any low grade computer. Also Bioshock 2 doesn't have much areas where view distance can be expanded, hence why it runs smooth on high. So... Maybe someone already said this, but this benchmark has a problem with multiple video cards. I'm certain i could break at least 7000 if not maybe 10000 (depending on when my processor would start to hold the engine back). However, looking at a program like GPU-Z (from TechPowerUp) or even just catalyst control center, it shows that only 1 of my radeon 5970 cores is actually doing work.
Also interesting, my scores from high (3700ish) and low (3800ish) are very close, indicating something else is creating a bottleneck. My Phenom II X4 is turning over between 25% and 45% utilization depending where in the demo. The single 5970 isn't running over 85% utilization (tho for anything besides furmark, this isn't exactly unusual). I haven't looked at what memory read and write bytes/sec are during the demo, but i have a hunch that the bottleneck doesn't lie there. So, any suggestions? Turning off aero got me about another 250 points or so (making both scores nearly or just over 4000) and overclocking from 725 to 850 GPU Core and 1000 to 1200 Graphics memory (in Mhz) gained me another 600 on both benchmarks, so the system seems to have room to breathe, but... i got 3 idle 5970s out of 4... how to i get it to use these? D: I still think the scoring system is off, or the cutscene is not good enough to test it like FFXI benchmark that it had with bunch of characters on screen. And yeah I don't think it works with SLI and Xfire yet.
For those not wanting to sift through:
Low  High  Asura.Bartimaeus said: Some more perspectives from a JP source on the benchmark: http://www.4gamer.net/games/092/G009287/20100616085/ Some graphs near the bottom with some tests done. Edit: Haha, thanks. This appears to be the problem... Translated_from_http://www.4gamer.net/games/092/G009287/20100616085/_by_google_chrome said: Dual GPU solution, "ATI Radeon HD 5970" The score is poor, the bench FFXIV window mode do not support ATI CrossFireX, ATI Catalyst or the incomplete profiles, or both, but because wax. It's gotta be the wax :-/ I guess i'll have to wait for full screen. ^_^ Wow, looking at these scores I don't know if my system will score high. Still waiting to get more cash for a new system. I'll run this when I get home tonight and see how much my PC fails.
2165 on my laptop. :|
I'm looking into better graphics cards anyway though, Nvidia GeForce GTX260s are pretty bleh. Asura.Bartimaeus said: Ragnarok.Ahtos said: Pandemonium.Kajidourden said: 2065 I call BS, I run Bioshock 2 on this PC on full specs and then some with no slowdown at all. That is what i said ^^ A high-end pc @ this time should get a score of 7000 Funny thing is the alpha version of FFXIV (which required higher specs) runs w/o problems and smooth (beside a little lag) and the benchmark wanna tell me i can't play the game lol I'm interested if there's any other alpha testers out there who run the game good and the benchmark fails them. Post anon if you're worried about NDAs, lol. Anyone else? me, my laptop runs alpha without the slightest problem and i got just over 1000 on rating Remora.Pentikiki said: Asura.Bartimaeus said: Some more perspectives from a JP source on the benchmark: http://www.4gamer.net/games/092/G009287/20100616085/ Some graphs near the bottom with some tests done. Edit: Haha, thanks. This appears to be the problem... Translated_from_http://www.4gamer.net/games/092/G009287/20100616085/_by_google_chrome said: Dual GPU solution, "ATI Radeon HD 5970" The score is poor, the bench FFXIV window mode do not support ATI CrossFireX, ATI Catalyst or the incomplete profiles, or both, but because wax. It's gotta be the wax :-/ I guess i'll have to wait for full screen. ^_^ Additionally, the benchmark at least, seems to only use 4 cores. I saw some questions on Core i7 systems and what they were utilizing. Interestingly, either my emulation is terrible, or this game isn't going to run well on single core computers. Changing affinity in task manager to just one core makes the demo run terribly slow. Putting it up to 2 cores more than doubles the performance (at least the perceived performance) and 3 cores and more makes another significant change to the appearance of the graph, tho, at least on my system, no significantly noticeable change to the game performance. I'd also point out that compared to the FFXI engine, the FFXIV engine seems to put more work on the graphics system and less on the CPU, tho since FFXI is single threaded (read: only uses one core) and this demo doesn't work well on a single thread either, perhaps this assessment is out of turn. >score less than 1000
PS3 for me Alpha =/= Retail product.
But Benchmark Software =/= Making any *** sense. Still a toss up. I think I'll still get it on PS3 regardless. My GPU heats up to 80c, which probably isn't uncommon, but my processor reaches a hefty 71c. I don't know if that's appropriate for an AMD Athlon x2 4200+ (Oc'd to 2.4GHZ[2.2GHZ stock]) Idle around 42c. Light load at 55c. My friend plays on alpha says it's so laggy it's almost unplayable. He scored a 1303 on the benchmark
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.