CPU Performance in Drive

I wouldn't add all the tests there, like nadeox where obviously he has some problem and he is getting less than half the fps I'm getting. I'm testing now with the covet, results soon.

 

I didn't use drowsysam's data, how about i put a - ? - next to nadeox's results if the numbers are questionable?
i just started testing with the covet so i could throw my processor on to the table for that...after that i think i will test my family desktop, but im predicting some abysmally low numbers for that

 

well isn't your cpu overclocked? nade's is stock, so that might have something to do with it (although, i wouldn't expect it to be that big of a fps difference, so that is still strange, but not as much as before (if your cpu is overclocked of course, which i believe it is)

 

It is, but going from 3,4Ghz to 4Ghz won't increase fps with 4 covets from 26 to 75... Look at my results, there's a huge difference with his, he probably had some overheating issue or something working on the background.


Intel i5 2500k @ 4Ghz
AMD HD 7950 @ 1,1Ghz

Physics on/off

1 - 288 | 940
2 - 157 | 750
3 - 105 | 524
4 - 75 | 395
5 - 36 | 316
6 - 22 | 262
7 - 19 | 220
8 - 16 | 190
9 - 13 | 165
10 - 13 | 148

 

yeah, but i imagine it still did help some with the difference (of course, not the ENTIRE fps difference obviously, but a little)

 

yeah he mentioned i think from 3.4 GHz to 4 GHz, so ther will be an improvement, but almost double seems like a bit much compared to nadeox's...if there is a problem with nadeox's data, then i agree it should be removed, but if both nade's and david's data is correct, then that's definitely something worth noting, so i encompassed nade's processor's name with ??

If there are repeat processors being tested that's fine, ill add a separate entry for each individual processor, afterall, there are other factors that will affect fps

 

Once you throw in 4/5+ cars the difference in fps should be small. Anyway I will try with stock clocks to see the difference in my case.

I'll test again this wednesday without overclock and also @ 1.6 Ghz Let's see what happens xDD

 

3770K @4.5GHz, AMD Radeon HD6870.
Gavril D-Series, all lowest settings/res, pure Grid map.

Phsysics On/Off
[TABLE="width: 128"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]295[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]845[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]160[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]535[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]103[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]379[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]73[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]305[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]56[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]242[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]44[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]197[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]24[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]166[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]21[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]149[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]18[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]125[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]17[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

i7 870 with Covet. I'm still benching others. Crashed at 7 and 8, but in past updates it leveled out there anyway to around 50 cars.
1 146/285
2 95/220
3 60/180
4 46/145 (You can feel the lag.)
5 23/132
6 19/127
7 15/125

Ishibu

 

ive been noticing that i have to take care to turn on physics *after* waiting a second *after* getting out of edit mode. It seems to crash for me when i toggle both at the same time, so i usually to physics off, edit on.....edit off, physics on.

 

yup that's what I always do, everytime I switch to editor mode or back to normal I pause physics to avoid crashing.

 

huh, oh well

 

D15
1. 150/277
2. 94/219
3. 60/200
4. 30/187
5. 22/177
6. 18/194
7. 15/158
8. CRASH

Also, just so everyone knows; 10% usage in the background will destroy your FPS. I was seeing anywhere from 25 to 45 with one D15 before I figured out what was taking CPU time.

 

still with the i7, right?

 

Yep, added my edit too. I'll get the 4670k later this week, maybe Saturday.

 

CPU : intel Xeon E3 1230 V3

gavril D-series (pickup)

cars-----phys on-----phys off
1-----------212---------360
2-----------140---------280
3-----------90-----------225
4-----------65-----------190
5-----------48-----------170
6-----------22-----------145--------from here (more than 5 cars) the game started crashing . and sending a report
7-----------19-----------135
8-----------17-----------125
9-----------15-----------110
10----------13-----------102

 

Moonhawk
1. 20 (D 244
2. 24/182 (PHYSICS FPS: 1600. Normal is 2000. In-game time actually slowed
3. 21/213
4. 18/155 1320
5. 16/140 1280
6. 13/120 1060
7. 11/120 880

Slo-mo is 100 physicsfps.



Physics FPS

 

wait so should i treat this differently?
and yeah, the moonhawk destroys my FPS

 

Not sure how you should graph it. Added a PhysicsFPS graph for whatever you guys may use it for.

 

The moonhawk is the most accurately simulated vehicle and therefore the most CPU intensive. Gabester said this somewhere.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk