Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

4850 Benchmarks Thread

L4d Frames

i played Left 4 Dead with EVERYTHING MAXED OUT. and i do mean everything.
3.06, 4850, my FPS was 60. i guess the game caps it at 60. i swear i saw the counter bounce up to over 100 for a fraction of a second but i could be mistaken. i didn't see it go below 58 at all, even when the screen was full of hordes.
unfortunately, mine is one of those that locks up. and it's not because of overheating, i played L4D for two hours before it locked up. a youtube video locked up in 5 minutes.
 
shaolindave said:
i played Left 4 Dead with EVERYTHING MAXED OUT. and i do mean everything.
3.06, 4850, my FPS was 60. i guess the game caps it at 60. i swear i saw the counter bounce up to over 100 for a fraction of a second but i could be mistaken. i didn't see it go below 58 at all, even when the screen was full of hordes.
unfortunately, mine is one of those that locks up. and it's not because of overheating, i played L4D for two hours before it locked up. a youtube video locked up in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...

are you using WiFi? If not, do you have WiFi disabled?
 
jmpage2 said:
Thanks!

It would be even more helpful if you could post frame rates, since "smooth and fast" is subjective. 30fps will seem smooth and fast to one person and intolerably jerky to another one.
Click to expand...

Yup, i'm willing to do so if you could just tell me the command to type in the console to get those fps.

I could compare also this way with my friend playing on a pc quad core and equipped with a desktop version of the ATI 4850. I could report here the results.

Anyway, i just try to max out the antialiasing yesterday and did not see any drop in fps compared to the first time i played the game with no antialiasing at all. This mac is awesome, I tell you.

Feels like the end of my nearly 10 years exclusive relationship with my pc.:D
 
shaolindave said:
i played Left 4 Dead with EVERYTHING MAXED OUT. and i do mean everything.
3.06, 4850, my FPS was 60. i guess the game caps it at 60. i swear i saw the counter bounce up to over 100 for a fraction of a second but i could be mistaken. i didn't see it go below 58 at all, even when the screen was full of hordes.
unfortunately, mine is one of those that locks up. and it's not because of overheating, i played L4D for two hours before it locked up. a youtube video locked up in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...

If you turned on VSYNC, 60fps is to be expected.
 
wow, do you guys realize the new iMac is the first (consumer) mac which can be considered a gaming machine! That's the beginning of a whole new era. Not only can it render the latest games with ease but also it is future proof (especially when upgraded to 8gb ram and a 64bit windows)
 
I tried Crysis wia bootcamp, set to 1600, settings max out... works great :D
But the iMac gets hot

I'll try to give precise numbers later today :)
 
I too tried out L4D at 1920x1200 with everything maxed and WOW it played fantastic. After playing about 15 minutes I quit and took off my headphones......The imac fans were running full-bore jet style.
 
Um this GT130 iMac laughs at L4D max'd (ok aa x4 as far as I pushed it) and most any game I throw at it. I rarely cross over to my PC to game anymore in fact.

So many people now with working as inteneded 4850's and still no real benchmarks in the benchmarks thread - what a shame. :confused:
 
itommyboy said:
So many people now with working as inteneded 4850's and still no real benchmarks in the benchmarks thread - what a shame. :confused:
Click to expand...
No kidding. Barefeats had a few preliminary things but I was kinda hping for more by this point. I'll try and post what I get when I get my Mac sometime early next week.
 
itommyboy said:
Um this GT130 iMac laughs at L4D max'd (ok aa x4 as far as I pushed it) and most any game I throw at it. I rarely cross over to my PC to game anymore in fact.

So many people now with working as inteneded 4850's and still no real benchmarks in the benchmarks thread - what a shame. :confused:
Click to expand...

There are several benchmarks posted earlier in this thread. So far, it seems that the 4850 is running 40-60% faster in games than the Nvidia card. So, the 4850 laughs at the GT130.
 
jmpage2 said:
There are several benchmarks posted earlier in this thread. So far, it seems that the 4850 is running 40-60% faster in games than the Nvidia card. So, the 4850 laughs at the GT130.
Click to expand...

Yeah we all see the "zomg L4D rules and wow is so cool looking I am on max settings and 80 fps I've been raiding for 48 hours straight ZOMGzers NERDRAGE!!!" Those are all fine and well and bring some hilarity to the place but I and most of us mean real benchmarks. *Cross fingers* come on barefeats inquiring minds want to know the true hard facts. *BTW bfeats I know you guys did not get your atiMac yet*
 
itommyboy said:
Yeah we all see the "zomg L4D rules and wow is so cool looking I am on max settings and 80 fps I've been raiding for 48 hours straight ZOMGzers NERDRAGE!!!" Those are all fine and well and bring some hilarity to the place but I and most of us mean real benchmarks. *Cross fingers* come on barefeats inquiring minds want to know the true hard facts. *BTW bfeats I know you guys did not get your atiMac yet*
Click to expand...

You apparently missed the real benchmark results, overseen by barefeats, on Call of Duty 4 and X-Plane, both of which saw 60% improvement over GT130. You also somehow managed to miss the controlled WOW test that barefeats has reported showing a 40%improvement.

Maybe you should spend more time reading the thread and less time pounding out witty comments? :D
 
jmpage2 said:
You apparently missed the real benchmark results, overseen by barefeats, on Call of Duty 4 and X-Plane, both of which saw 60% improvement over GT130. You also somehow managed to miss the controlled WOW test that barefeats has reported showing a 40%improvement.

Maybe you should spend more time reading the thread and less time pounding out witty comments? :D
Click to expand...


I've read all of these posts time and time again, hoping, waiting with baited breath that something real will arrive! Fact is it's all subjective. What you may call legit and detailed benchmarking others (I for one) may not. As for my witty posts, those are all just icing on the cake for you guys because daaaaaamn I am witty aren't I? :p Sorry it bothers you that you aren't.
 
itommyboy said:
I've read all of these posts time and time again, hoping, waiting with baited breath that something real will arrive! Fact is it's all subjective. What you may call legit and detailed benchmarking others (I for one) may not. As for my witty posts, those are all just icing on the cake for you guys because daaaaaamn I am witty aren't I? :p Sorry it bothers you that you aren't.
Click to expand...

BareFeats is as real as it gets for mac benchmarking.
 
Jack Flash said:
BareFeats is as real as it gets for mac benchmarking.
Click to expand...


And your point is? Have you guys even looked at the actual barefeats site? Even in this thread they point out that they have not tested their atiMac yet because they had yet to receive it. So how are you pointing to barefeats bmarks when they have not even as much as opened an atImac up yet? :eek:
 
itommyboy said:
And your point is? Have you guys even looked at the actual barefeats site? Even in this thread they point out that they have not tested their atiMac yet because they had yet to receive it. So how are you pointing to barefeats bmarks when they have not even as much as opened an atImac up yet? :eek:
Click to expand...

Barefeats doesn't have an iMac 4850 yet, or, has not had time to run the benchmarks since at the end of last week he did not have the new Mac.

He has had others run benchmarks though with his methods and I would believe those results are valid.
 
At Barefeats' request, I performed an X-Plane test for him (using a script he provided) on my 3.06 / 4850 iMac, and posted the numeric results on this board more than a week ago. I believe that a copy of these results was quoted in reply #3 in this very topic.
 
jmpage2 said:
So, if I'm summarizing correctly here, with the limited testing we've seen to date, the 4850 Radeon iMac is;

60% faster in X-Plane
60% faster in COD4
42% faster in WoW

Glad I waited for 4850 card equipped machine for the measley $50. I almost suspect that this would have been the standard high end card on the iMac refresh if it had been ready sooner and had been more stable.
Click to expand...


:confused: I don't think barefeats mentioned the 4850 in his WOW summary. I re-read it 3X. Did I miss something?
 
Gasu E. said:
:confused: I don't think barefeats mentioned the 4850 in his WOW summary. I re-read it 3X. Did I miss something?
Click to expand...

if you do a search of posts by barefeats you will see that recently he did provide some WoW benchmark numbers for the 4850 that were provided by someone under his direction (since he does not have the card yet).
 
Now that you guys are talking about performance.

I'm about to get my first Mac, the iMac w/ 4850, not available as of yet at my local Apple Store in Miami. I'm a multimedia freak and have my PC connected w/ HDMI through my Yamaha receiver to a HD TV. For the iMac I need a converter video cable and mini toslink to toslink cable for the audio. I only play one game, Real Flight flight simulator. Is this gonna work out fine? My PC also has the 4850 which is about the minimum the game requires at a 1080p resolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back