Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
4850 Benchmarks Thread
- Thread starter jmpage2
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Crysis runs smoothly in 1600x1200, AA off, everything on 'high' (couldn't try 'very high', I'm using XP), approx 25 fps.
It runs similarily well in 1200x1080(ish) with AAx2.
It runs similarily well in 1200x1080(ish) with AAx2.
Crysis runs smoothly in 1600x1200, AA off, everything on 'high' (couldn't try 'very high', I'm using XP), approx 25 fps.
It runs similarily well in 1200x1080(ish) with AAx2.
25 fps is hardly smooth. 1600x1200... Thats not even a real 16:10 aspect ratio. Same goes for 1200x1080ish
No problem. Not trying to be a dick or anything... but I think many would agree 25 is pretty poor. Maybe you should try another "16:10" resolution to get more performance and so your hud doesnt look out of whack.
Perhaps 1440x900 or 1280x800?
How's that for a contribution?
I thought of that, but oddly, 1440x900 or 1280x800 don't appear in the list of available resolutions. Aspect ratio is set on automatic, I'll try to force it to 16:10, see if the suggested resolutions are different. Thanks for the suggestion, hoonu.
25 fps obvioulsy isn't the best but I find it sufficient for my gaming needs. Particularily when it comes to Crysis, I'd rather enjoy the best possible graphics and lose a few frames per sec. Plus I genuinely don't fint it choppy. I think the motion blur helps.
For info, I've tweaked (most) graphics to 'very high', using MrGnome's hack (had to lower res to 1400x1050). It really looks amazing.
EDIT: Ok, nevermind, Crysis does not offer to force aspect ration like CoD4 does. And the resolutions offered are not 16:10 --> 1200x768; 1200x1024, 1400x1050, 1600x1200. I suppose I'll have to leave it as it is.
New Bare Feats benchmarks!
Close to buying new imac w/4850 and so been following this thread for a while now. I know we've been waiting for Barefeats benchmarks, but in the meantime, thought everyone might find this interesting.
Cheers.
www.barefeats.com/imac09c.html
Close to buying new imac w/4850 and so been following this thread for a while now. I know we've been waiting for Barefeats benchmarks, but in the meantime, thought everyone might find this interesting.
Cheers.
www.barefeats.com/imac09c.html
I just notice the iMac with 4850 has lower clock speed CPU.
Even though GPU plays a more important role in gaming, it's still impressive considering the $50 price difference.
If the freezing issue didn't exist the $50 upgrade would be a no brainer. Even still I fully believe the freezing issue will be a non issue in a few weeks and teh ATI card will be the way to go.
I agree, most people watch films at 30fps and find that sufficient. I play games with a ATI 3650 and it does well at 1920x1080 med/high settings in company of heroes. I'm fine with the performance. I'm sure the 4850 screams by comparison.
Cheers,
Lotz of 3D Game results for 4850
Though we ordered it on March 5th, our iMac 3.06 with Radeon HD 4850 didn't arrive until Friday, May 8th. I ran our regular suite of 3D Games at 1920x1200 High Quality (ET:QW, CoD4, Halo, Prey, X-Plane). Our graphs show how it compares to various other iMac GPUs as well as some "comparable" Mac Pro GPUs:
http://www.barefeats.com/imac09.html
As for freezing, we haven't had seen that behavior so far. I noticed the May 2nd firmware upgrade for the iMac was already installed in our unit when it arrived.
Though we ordered it on March 5th, our iMac 3.06 with Radeon HD 4850 didn't arrive until Friday, May 8th. I ran our regular suite of 3D Games at 1920x1200 High Quality (ET:QW, CoD4, Halo, Prey, X-Plane). Our graphs show how it compares to various other iMac GPUs as well as some "comparable" Mac Pro GPUs:
http://www.barefeats.com/imac09.html
As for freezing, we haven't had seen that behavior so far. I noticed the May 2nd firmware upgrade for the iMac was already installed in our unit when it arrived.
Why do you refuse to test WoW? The game has pretty decent graphics and expansions coming out all the time.. Cmon...
He doesn't refuse to test WoW. Have you seen any of his previous benchmarks? As far as graphics go, even with the recent expansion they're still pretty old and most modern computers from 2006 onwards can run the game well.
What indicates that they "refused" to test WoW? We should be grateful that they tested on a weekend for us nerds as it is!
Barefeats have previously reported that WoW is notoriously difficult to benchmark since it's an online game and any little change in the online environment will result in different benchmark scores.
If you look at earlier results in this thread I believe other members have reported an approximate 30% improvement on WoW with the 4850 card over the GT130.
I'm sure glad that I ordered the 4850 and glad Apple provided the fix to the problems in a relatively short amount of time!
If someone is a casual gamer of any kind or a serious gamer wanting to game on a Mac the 4850 card is a no brainer so glad I waited and got the fastest gaming iMac ever!
Barefeats have previously reported that WoW is notoriously difficult to benchmark since it's an online game and any little change in the online environment will result in different benchmark scores.
If you look at earlier results in this thread I believe other members have reported an approximate 30% improvement on WoW with the 4850 card over the GT130.
I'm sure glad that I ordered the 4850 and glad Apple provided the fix to the problems in a relatively short amount of time!
If someone is a casual gamer of any kind or a serious gamer wanting to game on a Mac the 4850 card is a no brainer so glad I waited and got the fastest gaming iMac ever!
Maybe I missed this but, are Barefeat's benchmarks done under OSX or Windows XP/Vista within Bootcamp?