Fallout 3 Performance

Fallout 3 is our replacement for Oblivion, but we see a lot more data compression here. Despite the fact that framerates were perfectly capable of rising beyond even 120 frames per second, our test seems fairly system limited at under 80 frames per second. We'll do what we can in the meantime but we will be looking for a better test going forward.

Fallout 3

Despite the limitations, at 2560x1600 we do see some separation in the single card arena. The GTX 285 does pull ahead of the original GTX 280 and the Radeon HD 4870 1GB. The Radeon HD 4870 X2 does still lead the GTX 285 though. And there is just nothing we can determine about the SLI and CrossFire solutions with this data. But here are the rest of the numbers for those who want them.


Click to Enlarge

Crysis Warhead Performance FarCry 2 Performance
POST A COMMENT

76 Comments

View All Comments

  • MadMan007 - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    The benchmark numbers are there below the graphs but I agree that charting 2560x1600 isn't very realistic. Maybe the benchmarkers are getting a little out of touch with what real people have for monitors. Reply
  • Beno - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    ffs its been 2 years and we still cant get pass 100 fps burrier in crysis at 1650x !!

    every new cards ati and nv makes, only gives around extra 10 fps on that game :(
    Reply
  • MadMan007 - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    One detail that's not clear, and this is partly because of NVs confusingly named releases, is which GTX 260 is included in the charts. We know it's not the 55nm, but is it 192 or 216 shader? Lots of websites forget to put this detail in their testing, just writing GTX26-192 or -216 would make it clear. Thanks. Reply
  • jabber - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    ....those bizarre S-Video outputs?

    Why not something more useful? Or just drop them completely.
    Reply
  • Odeen - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    The S-Video outputs are industry standard, and are used to connect to SD TV sets.. I don't see what's so bizzare or useless about them. Reply
  • jabber - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link

    But who uses them?

    I've never seen anyone use them and I havent read about anyone trying for years. When they did all those years ago the VIVO thing was a mess or a pain to get working.

    Just seems pointless now especially for SDTV.
    Reply
  • MadMan007 - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link

    While it's an s-video looking output it's not just for s-video, they are used for component output as well I believe. Reply
  • SpacemanSpiff46 - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    Any reason the 4850 X2 is being neglected so much? I have not seen any reviews with this card. Also, it would be nice to see how the 9800GX2 is stacking up with these cards. Reply
  • bob4432 - Thursday, January 15, 2009 - link

    wonder the same thing myself - the 4850 is a good card alone and the price is very nice. add to that that many people are running a 4850, this could be a very attractive upgrade - lets see some 4850 cf setup #s/comparisons too Reply
  • Sunagwa - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link

    I have to agree. I always go for the most value when I purchase my parts.

    Granted "value" can easily be taken out of context considering obviously wide ranging income.

    For me however the 4850 (this time around, I am a PC gamer at heart) was the absolute choice when I purchased it.

    Getting back on topic, I would love to see the CF setup as well as the dual GPU setup included in your review. If only to be able to compare the performance and possible upgrade potential of my current computer to your test bed.

    Just a side note for those who care but my C2DUO-Wolfdale OC'D to 4Ghz that I payed 160$US for has me very happy and I could care less about Corei7...wait...no I could not. 8)

    Regards,
    Sunagwa
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now