Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Performance

Version: 1.4

Settings: All Highest Quality

For this benchmark, we use FRAPS to measure average frame rate during the opening cut-scene of the game. We start FRAPS as soon as the screen clears in the helicopter and we stop it right as the captain grabs his head gear. As we saw in the preview, this game does scale beyond two GPUs, and our tests here show some very interesting results.

Call of Duty 4 Multi-GPU Scaling over Resolution


Unlike in Oblivion, Call of Duty 4 scales well with three or four GPUs no matter what resolution we are running. We did enable the option to support dual graphics cards, and it is clear that when developers put some effort into explicitly supporting multi-GPU configurations good results can be achieved. This is also interesting in light of the fact that this game is a little more flat when it comes to resolution scaling than other titles.

Call of Duty 4 Performance


Call of Duty 4 Performance
  1280x1024 1600x1200 1920x1200 2560x1600
NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT SLI 127.7 116 104.3 78.8
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra SLI 145.8 134.1 127.4 102.8
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra 78.3 75.7 70 57.5
NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT 66.5 59.4 55 40.8
AMD Radeon HD 3870x2 (x 2) 89.6 86.3 82.6 74.8
AMD Radeon HD 3870x2 + 3870 78.2 74.8 72.9 64.5
AMD Radeon HD 3870 X2 61.5 56 53.8 47.5
AMD Radeon HD 3870 46.4 41.3 38.2 29.6


In spite of the fact that four GPUs scales well on AMD hardware, NVIDIA's 8800 Ultra GPUs in SLI handily outperform the quad solution, as does 9600 GT SLI up to 2560x1600. Call of Duty 4 has certainly favored NVIDIA hardware, as is shown by the fact that a single 8800 Ultra can keep up with three 3870 cards in CrossFireX, and a single 9600 GT performs on par with the 3870X2.

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Performance S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Performance
Comments Locked

36 Comments

View All Comments

  • mmntech - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    I'm running an HD 3850 256mb and I get 40fps average in low density areas, 12.4fps in London. Ultra quality of course with no AA and in game AF at 1440x900. That's DirectX 9.0 performance, which is all I could test since I don't run Vista. Flight Simulator has always been very CPU dependent, particularly concerning autogen scenery, and AI traffic along with the complex physics engine. Since FSX with SP1 can take advantage of up to four CPU cores, it might be worth starting off there. I did my tests using an Athlon 64 X2 3800+, everything at stock speeds with 2gb PC3200. If I were you, I'd go with the single 3870 X2 card. Cheaper than buying two separate 3870s. For nVidia, maybe two 8800GTS 640mb cards in SLI or better if you want the best performance. I'd wait for nVidia to release the 9800GX2 first though to see what cards offer the best performance per dollar.

    As for the article, I really wonder if using more than two cards is really practical. You can get almost the same performance with two 9600GTs as with three or four HD 3750s but the two 9600GTs are far cheaper. This begs the question, is spending the extra $400 really worth it for such minimal gains? I know for some it is but then why buy mid-range cards when a couple 8800GTXs will cost the same in the end. Plus there's also the increased heat and power consumption from using four cards instead of two. I'd like to see more info on that.
  • Incisal flyer - Monday, March 10, 2008 - link

    Thanks for the replies derek anm mmntech. Mmntech, yes my feelings exactly about quad (basically) crossfire. I'm no computer geek (more like a newbie really - I don't understand understand most of what I read in the forums and couldn't overclock a toaster if you held my mother hostage). Multiple crossfire sounds just too exotic at this point and would be more headache than it is worth. Thanks for your feedback and happy flying.

    The Flyer
  • DerekWilson - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    i'm looking at fsx acceleration for future graphics articles ...

    no promises, but i've been testing it internally.
  • Sundox - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    isn't multi GPU the cheap way to go?
    I'm asking this because I can't figure a car race won by two slower cars, against the faster car, or two knifes cutting my steak smoother.
    to me, it looks like the problem is,... coping with the problem, the companies just want to have the most powerful GPU, not the most efficiant.
    I might be totaly wrong.
  • coldpower27 - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    It's more like a delivery race rather then a car race, who can deliver the total shipment fastest?

    Two smaller trucks pulling half the load each, or a single truck pulling a larger load, the larger truck's engine is more complex, and hence more difficult to build, vs the smaller trucks which have smaller engines which are easier.

  • Griswold - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    Analogies like that do not always work just like that.

    Besides that, the car race example isnt that simple anyhow. Imagine a 24h race which could easily be won by even one slower car, as long as it is more reliable than the faster one. Remember, in order to finish first, one must first finish. This, of course, has little to nothing to do with video cards, hence, analogies dont always work.
  • legoman666 - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    analogies almost never work.
  • DerekWilson - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    "Like a balloon, and... something bad happens!"
  • Simon128D - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    I love the reviews and benchmarks here, I really do but I'm getting sick and tired of seeing the test system being only a super high end machine with hardware that the average person can't afford and I think benchmarking with skull trail on its own is silly. Tis applies to other site as well.

    Don't get me wrong, I enjoy seeing benchmarks from a high end system like skull trail but how many people actually have or can afford a system like that. I'd like to see more of a mid range setup inculded in graphics benchmarks - that will give a more realistic view point. A system say with a 780i or X38 chipset with a Q6600 and 4GB DDR2 800Mhz etc.

    Just my thoughts.
  • DigitalFreak - Saturday, March 8, 2008 - link

    It's really the only way to make sure the games they're testing with aren't CPU limited.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now