Originally we had planned on doing a rather quick Far Cry 2 performance article, as the game has been anticipated for quite some time and we like to keep our benchmarks up to date with the latest and greatest titles. Unfortunately we hit some snags along the way. We've finally got all the data we can pull together ready to go, and there is quite a bit of it. Despite some issues that precluded us obtaining all the data we wanted, we do have an interesting picture of Far Cry 2 performance.

Because of the inclusion of a very robust and useful benchmarking tool, the process of collecting the data was greatly eased. Unfortunately, the benchmark tool was a bit unstable, which did mean lots of babysitting. But other than that, it was still a much nicer process to benchmark Far Cry 2 than most other games. The tool not only helps with running the benchmark, but it does a great job of collecting data. Lots of data. But we'll get to all that in a bit.

By now, many people know about the AMD driver issues that have plagued their Far Cry 2 performance and consistency. We were unable to test CrossFire because of driver issues. We didn't do a full SLI analysis because there isn't much to compare it against, but we did include two SLI configurations in order to help illustrate the potential scaling we could see from other SLI setups and to give us a target to hope CrossFire eventually hits (when it works). It is worth noting that this is the kind of issue that really damages AMD's credibility with respect to going single card CrossFire on the high end. We absolutely support their strategy, but they have simply got to execute. This type of a fumble is simply unacceptable.

Our line up tests will be an analysis of Far Cry 2 performance running with High, Very High and Ultra Quality with and without AA under DX9 and DX10. After we take a look at that we'll drill down into Ultra High quality DX10 performance and look at AMD and NVIDIA performance from top to bottom. We will touch on both built in and custom demo performance and 4xAA as well.

Benchmarking Software: an Analysis of Far Cry 2 Settings under AMD and NVIDIA


View All Comments

  • toyota - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link

    graphics a joke? on very high or ultra they seem pretty good to me. now the character models look goofy but thats about it for my complaints on the way it looks. now gameplay is a different story. I am growing tired of driving around and running through re spawned enemy checkpoints as if nothing happened just 1 minute earlier. also the AI is stupid as hell. they will shoot at you and then look the other way or even up in the air sometimes. too bad ubi screwed this one up. Reply
  • Griswold - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link

    He's right though. Its aimed at consoles and thus the textures are "cheap" compared to whats possible. It has this typical console touch as far as visuals go. :( Reply
  • clairvoyant129 - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link

    Every other sites show GTX 260 Core 216 leading over HD4870 1GB... tells you something about Anand. Reply
  • SiliconDoc - Friday, November 28, 2008 - link

    Well someone has to cheer for the stuttering underdawg ... if they all told the truth, amd/ati sales would plummet and competition might then be over.
    I have been amazed myself - the kind of seemingly unavoidable bias that has been everywhere with the 4000 release - I guess they like the color red or hate the leader - LOL - no that wasn't a political comment.
    Maybe it's cheering for the underdog - or blowing off pent up steam on the NV card namings and reissuings of barely changed cards with bit width and shaders mixed about in number.
    Something is definitely causing it - but it is becoming ever clearer that just screaming ATI has a driver update every month won't cut it.
    People cheer for what they like or bought, for whatever reason and with the massively complex benching and work involved it's no surprise one side gets a break the other side doesn't.
    I certainly don't blame the people - gosh having to watch every word is difficult - and then meeting work deadlines - and colluding with the vendors that work with them - there's a lot more to the nightmare than I see when I'm critiquing the benchmark bias....
    ( Doesn't mean the bias isn't there - but then again human nature is complex )
    Anyway, thanks for saying it - what you said about other benchmarks being different.
    ( Yes I saw Derek's explanation below - oh well pressure at the workplace makes things happen - and with everyone so touchy I suppose threats would issue if they didn't claim everything is almost equal. )
    At least some can see clearly what is going on, that makes me happy.
  • kr7400 - Tuesday, December 02, 2008 - link

    Can you please fucking die? Preferably by getting crushed to death in a garbage compactor, by getting your face cut to ribbons with a pocketknife, your head cracked open with a baseball bat, your stomach sliced open and your entrails spilled out, and your eyeballs ripped out of their sockets. *beep* bitch

    I would love to kick you hard in the face, breaking it. Then I'd cut your stomach open with a chainsaw, exposing your intestines. Then I'd cut your windpipe in two with a boxcutter. Then I'd tie you to the back of a pickup truck, and drag you, until your useless *beep* corpse was torn to a million *beep* useless, bloody, and gory pieces.

    Hopefully you'll get what's coming to you. *beep* bitch

    I really hope that you get curb-stomped. It'd be hilarious to see you begging for help, and then someone stomps on the back of your head, leaving you to die in horrible, agonizing pain. *beep*

    Shut the *beep* up f aggot, before you get your face bashed in and cut to ribbons, and your throat slit.

    You're dead if I ever meet you in real life, f ucker. I'll f ucking kill you.

    I would love to f ucking send your f ucking useless ass to the hospital in intensive care, fighting for your worthless life.


    I wish you a truly painful, bloody, gory, and agonizing death, *beep*
  • Snarks - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link

    care to back that claim up, or just spew forth more bs? Reply
  • Carfax - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link

    Anandtech is the only website I've seen that shows ATI's part leading Nvidia in Far Cry 2.

    The GTX 260 216 is typically compared to the 4870 1GB in this game..

    Anandtech is the only site I've seen where the 4870 1GB actually beats the GTX 280.

    Also, there is NO MENTION whatsoever as to what Nvidia driver version the author uses in the article near as I can tell.

    The 180xx series brings substantial performance increases for Nvidia cards in this game.
  • chizow - Saturday, November 22, 2008 - link

    The Nvidia drivers and results are probably at least 3 weeks old:

    And the irony of it all, as the reason given as to why the review wasn't published earlier?:


    Well, in this case it was the fact that AMD just released a new hotfix driver for Far Cry 2 that fixes a couple rendering issues the original hotfix had. It wouldn't do to publish an article with numbers from an old driver, so here we are retesting things.

    If this FC2 review wasn't really "Shitting on AMD's Drivers Part 3" you might think AT was being biased. Personally I think its just poor testing standards. Derek is clearly being overambitious with his scope and the result is his work is dated before its even published. Derek really takes criticism and suggestions poorly though, so I doubt we'll see any changes. I was glad to see Gary Key include some additional info in his last set of benches, in a motherboard review of all places! http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3459&am...">http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3459&am...
  • DerekWilson - Monday, November 24, 2008 - link

    My drivers for NVIDIA were 180.44

    This driver featured all the same performance improvements of 180.48, but I had access to it much earlier. The difference is that new features were not yet implemented. I did not use outdated performance data for this. Every other test with Far Cry 2 and NVIDIA would have either used this driver or the 180.43 (well, maybe they would have used 180.47 ... but either way, perf was the same).

    The reason my results show the 4870 1GB pushing past the NV cards is very likely for two reasons: I made my own demo, and I took the highest of 3 runs per test rather than the average. It's easy to see that the custom demo does paint the 4870 1GB in a favorable light, and I explain why I take the highest of 3 runs on the second to last page when I'm talking about the problems we had with AMD drivers.
  • chizow - Monday, November 24, 2008 - link

    I'm not sure how you can claim the drivers and performance is the same when:

    1) You are not using the 180.48 drivers.
    2) Other review sites have shown significant differences in performance between drivers, even earlier 180.43 to 180.48.
    3) Your results are clearly the outlier amongst a sea of review sites that use the actual 180.48 drivers.
    4) Your results are at least 3 weeks old, but you still consider them accurate because you think 180.44 = 180.48 in terms of performance.

    Besides the other glaring problems with this review that you've acknowledged, that's a pretty far leap to make. Instead of just assuming the results between drivers are the same, why not re-run some tests to confirm or deny? As of right now, running these results really undermine you and the sites credibility.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now