Performance Tests
We found that the X3 rolling demo makes a good benchmark due to its excellent graphics. The benchmark is fairly long and covers many different aspects of the game like fighting and building complex structures. In addition to being able to adjust standard settings like resolution and AA/AF, there are high, medium and low options for both shader and texture quality. There is also a handy feature that sends a breakdown of the details of the different scenes in the demo to a file for reference. These details include average, minimum and maximum frame rates for each scene in the demo, as well as the settings enabled for the benchmark. We ran several tests with X3 to see the kind of results that we would get across a range of NVIDIA and ATI cards. Here is the list of cards as well as the system that we tested:
The interesting thing that we see here is how close together all the numbers are. It's also interesting to see that X3 seems to favor both ATI and NVIDIA hardware in the same manner, as NVIDIA does better in general by only a few frames. Overall, the results are somewhat eerie given that each card on one side of the ATI/NVIDIA line gets a very similar frame rate to its competition on the other side. This means that the X3 rolling demo will probably make a very well-rounded addition to our performance benchmarks for future reviews.
We also wanted to see how CPU intensive X3 was on our system, so we tested the game on our highest performing card (7800 GTX 512) with both our standard 2.6GHz processor (AMD Athlon FX-55) and a slower 1.8GHz processor (the FX-55 with a multiplier of 9 to simulate a slower processor). This helps us get a better idea of how much CPU speed affects performance in the game.
As illustrated, what is most noticeable here is that without AA enabled, the benchmark's frame rate on the 1.8GHz system is almost exactly the same between the two resolutions. Even when AA is enabled at 12x10, we are still CPU bound. This means that, in general, lower speed processors will have a large impact on framerate for higher end graphics cards. Even our high end CPU was limited with high end graphics cards plugged in, making this game a good CPU benchmark as well as a good GPU test. People with mid-range GPUs probably won't need anything more than an entry level current generation Athlon 64 for good performance - after all, we will never run into the CPU limit if the graphics card isn't fast enough to outpace the CPU when running X3.
We found that the X3 rolling demo makes a good benchmark due to its excellent graphics. The benchmark is fairly long and covers many different aspects of the game like fighting and building complex structures. In addition to being able to adjust standard settings like resolution and AA/AF, there are high, medium and low options for both shader and texture quality. There is also a handy feature that sends a breakdown of the details of the different scenes in the demo to a file for reference. These details include average, minimum and maximum frame rates for each scene in the demo, as well as the settings enabled for the benchmark. We ran several tests with X3 to see the kind of results that we would get across a range of NVIDIA and ATI cards. Here is the list of cards as well as the system that we tested:
| Testbed | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor |
| Memory: | 2x512MB OCZ 2-2-2-6 1T DDR400 RAM |
| Motherboard: | SI K8N Neo4 Platinum/SLI |
| Hard Drive: | Seagate 7200.7 120 GB |
| Power Supply: | OCZ 600 W PowerStream |
| Graphics Card: | NVIDIA 6600 GT NVIDIA 6800 GS NVIDIA 7800 GT NVIDIA 7800 GTX NVIDIA 7800 GTX (512) ATI X800 GTO ATI X1300 Pro ATI X1600 XT ATI X1800 XL ATI X1800 XT |
The interesting thing that we see here is how close together all the numbers are. It's also interesting to see that X3 seems to favor both ATI and NVIDIA hardware in the same manner, as NVIDIA does better in general by only a few frames. Overall, the results are somewhat eerie given that each card on one side of the ATI/NVIDIA line gets a very similar frame rate to its competition on the other side. This means that the X3 rolling demo will probably make a very well-rounded addition to our performance benchmarks for future reviews.
We also wanted to see how CPU intensive X3 was on our system, so we tested the game on our highest performing card (7800 GTX 512) with both our standard 2.6GHz processor (AMD Athlon FX-55) and a slower 1.8GHz processor (the FX-55 with a multiplier of 9 to simulate a slower processor). This helps us get a better idea of how much CPU speed affects performance in the game.
| Processor | AA/AF | Resolution | Performance |
| 2.6GHz | Enabled | 1600x1200 | 47.5 |
| 1280x1024 | 57.8 | ||
| Disabled | 1600x1200 | 59.0 | |
| 1280x1024 | 63.8 | ||
| 1.8GHz | Enabled | 1600x1200 | 44.9 |
| 1280x1024 | 49.5 | ||
| Disabled | 1600x1200 | 50.4 | |
| 1280x1024 | 50.8 |
As illustrated, what is most noticeable here is that without AA enabled, the benchmark's frame rate on the 1.8GHz system is almost exactly the same between the two resolutions. Even when AA is enabled at 12x10, we are still CPU bound. This means that, in general, lower speed processors will have a large impact on framerate for higher end graphics cards. Even our high end CPU was limited with high end graphics cards plugged in, making this game a good CPU benchmark as well as a good GPU test. People with mid-range GPUs probably won't need anything more than an entry level current generation Athlon 64 for good performance - after all, we will never run into the CPU limit if the graphics card isn't fast enough to outpace the CPU when running X3.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
Houdani - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
And while you're at it, fill in the 12x10 graph with the rest of the cards which were omitted, rather than just benching the low end and high end cards (we in the middle would like to see how our cards fare). Much obliged.Lalakai - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
I've been waiting for this game to come out for months, and now learn that during install process, a copy protection system may be installed (rootkit/starforce) on your system. I haven't been able to confirm this, and currently have that question posted to the company. I'm constantly making the kids made because i won't let 'em copy music cd's or games, and i support anti-piracy efforts, but to have a company try to hide software on my system...........regardless of how good the game is, i'll vote with my pocketbook and leave it on the shelf.DerekWilson - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
AFAIK only the EU version of X3 employs StarForce.As much as I hate and dispise StarForce (it makes testing very difficult), it is not a rootkit. There has been much debate online about possible malicious uses for SF, but (unfortunately) none have been found.
Why is it unfortunate that no SF is not a rootkit? Because that would be the best and easiest way to fight it. I wish it were as bad a situation as the Sony DRM problem ... but people need to get as upset about having their fair use rights trampled on as they do about opening their system up to hackers if there is going to be anything done about StarForce.
Obviously our focus here at AT is hardware, but I'll get up on my soap box and yell about how DRM in general is a waste of time and money. Storage, memory, CPU cycles, and other resources are wasted on implimenting hardware and software that doesn't do anything to stop real pirates (those who copy and sell media or games for profit).
For online games checking cd keys against others online already is an effective means for keeping copying down without getting in the way of people who want to make copies of their media and wasting the resources of system on which the software is installed.
But that's as far as copy protection should go.
The answer is education. If companies dumped all the money they are wasting on DRM into educating the public about their own rights and making them feel good about being consumers, a whole lot more would get done.
Copiers, scanners, typewriters, printers, and pen and paper are every where ... how has the publishing industry survived for so long without copy protection?
The problem is the industry itself and the attiude of the public.
aka1nas - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
Actually ALL versions of X3 currently being published employ starforce. Both the US CD and DVD versions use it as well as the Australian version.Lalakai - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
easiest way to get message across is through market pressure. Gamers are constantly demanding better graphics, sound, and speed; this demand should also be linked to system privacy and individual rights. I have no qualms accepting anti-piracy protections and education. Protection shouldn't extend to installing specific protection software on the system, and if the programers feel this is their best option, then the response should be purchase of games and products that do not incorporate these means. As much as I enjoy X2 and have looked forward to X3, i'll likely let it slide and voice my opinion on every board that i participate in.DerekWilson - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
X2 used StarForce as well ...And programmers don't usually decide what copy protection the publisher/distributor is going to use.
Lalakai - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
lol just had to torment me didn't ya :~(guess i'm gonna have to be a little less trusting, and more investigative before using software. might be time to revisit EOC and Freelancer for awhile
............ummmm, now i gotta check and see if they also used StarForce.
thanks though for the info
alexhall50 - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
StarForce is used to copy protect X3. If you look on the Egosoft forums then you will see that there have been a number of "conversations" on this topic. However the copy protection system used is not determined by the developer, rather it is determined by the Publisher. As such EgoSoft don't have much say on this. (At least that is my understanding).
regards
Alex
Phiro - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
That I disagree with - that's the same thing as a hooker saying "sorry baby I can't do rodeo style because my pimp won't let me".Publishers do not MAKE the development company do anything - the development company signed the fucking contract with their eyes WIDE OPEN.
alexhall50 - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
X3 does support SLI, however it does not (currently) support multi-monitor gaming (in the way X2 did) or widescreen support (although this will hopefully come in a patch).
I have a question on this benchmark review...
X3 has an option to automatically adjust the quality control of the game and some other graphics tweaks that are not explicitly mentioned within the review as to whether they were used.
So specifically was Auto Quality Control used within X3 for these benchmarks as this would help improve the scores of the less powerful cards?
I have an AMD64 3500XP+, 2GB RAM and a 7800GT graphics card. While my average framerate is around 30-35 (1280*1024, 4AA, 4AF, all settings high) I do notice extreme slowdown and jerkiness during the rolling demo.
regards
Alex