BigFoot Networks Killer NIC: Killer Marketing or Killer Product?
by Gary Key on October 31, 2006 2:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Networking
Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter
While not the most popular online shooter this game has picked up steam lately with the 1.3 patch. We are playing on the Strongpoint map with a total of 12 players. Our video resolution is at 1280x1024 HQ and we found this game to be very playable at frame rates above 40 fps. The servers we connected with were generally showing ping rates around 45ms to 60ms at the time of connection.
We see a very slight frame rate improvement in this game but nothing that was noticeable during game play. It was difficult to tell any differences in game play between each product and as far as we could tell all systems played the game in a similar manner. If we had to make a choice we would choose the NVIDIA nForce 590SLI NIC as it seemed a tad bit smoother in certain areas.
Company of Heroes
Company of Heroes is one of our favorite RTS games around the office. We are playing the Lorraine map in one versus one player mode. Our other test party hosted the game and we found their system configuration to be nearly identical to ours. Our resolution was set to 1280x1024 with all options on high except for AA. This game is very playable with frame rates above 35 fps in multiplayer action.
Bigfoot Networks stated to us early on not to expect any measureable performance differences in the majority of RTS games. Sure enough we did not see any improvements although the Killer NIC did score a little higher than our D-Link solutions. Once again, we did not notice any real differences in game play between any of the products. We actually tried the Killer NIC in APP mode and were greeted with basically the same level of performance.
Rise of Legends
This game was released a few months back and like most real time strategy games is very CPU intensive but still offers a very visual experience. In order to experience the game properly you need a fast CPU, very good memory subsystem, and a decent GPU to play at the higher resolutions. This is one game that seems to have the perfect recipe for the Killer NIC. We are playing the Spire Forest map with Vinci versus Vinci. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average frame rate above 40 fps.
Although BigFoot Networks had stated most RTS games will not show any improvements we see a slight increase in frame rates with this game. We have to temper our results with the fact that there was not any noticeable difference in game play between the various products once again. In a blind performance test, any setup could have won for the most enjoyable game play experience.
World of WarCraft
WoW is the largest and probably most enjoyable MMO we have played and is a favorite amongst many of our staff members. This is another title that BigFoot Networks has explicitly stated will show performance improvements and is one that is mentioned in most of their marketing materials. We logged in at several different times that range from Wednesday morning to late night Saturdays to ensure we experienced a wide variety and number of players on the server. We started in the Dalaran Ruins and traveled to the Alterac Valley battlegrounds doing our best to battle the same creatures with each character.
We see about a 4% increase over our other products in frame rates. WoW is basically capped at 64 fps with dual core systems so it is difficult to determine if the Killer NIC would provide any further frame rate increases with our test platform. We have seen increases quoted in the 10% or plus range in this game so we utilized a 3.4GHz P4 in our test bed and noted a 9% increase in frame rates. The Killer NIC gets a point for increasing frame rates as advertised. Of course anything over 35 fps in this game is very playable so the increases while nice did not really improve our game play.
Ping rates did improve by up to 7% (host system improvements and server variables) and this is where we did notice a difference in game play during the busy test sessions on Friday and Saturday nights. When our area was full of players we did notice smoother game play at times with the Killer NIC. This did not happen when we were basically the only characters playing in certain sections. This game is designed to a certain degree for higher ping rates so there is some balancing that is already done by the server during combat. Overall, the Killer NIC performed almost as advertised in this benchmark.
In order to make sure we were not drinking the Snake Oil we did a blind performance test in WoW with a third party. The third party had no idea their on-board NIC had been replaced with the Killer NIC. The first reaction was a question asking if an additional one gigabyte of RAM had been added to the system or if the video card had been changed. This would normally make for very good publicity and we found it slightly amazing that someone would pick up on the differences in performance so quickly. However, this configuration was a dual core CPU based mid-range system and the user would not be one to spend $279.99 on a peripheral other than a new graphics card. If someone had offered them this card for $50 in order to improve their WoW experience they probably would have jumped at it instead of gasping when told the actual price.
While not the most popular online shooter this game has picked up steam lately with the 1.3 patch. We are playing on the Strongpoint map with a total of 12 players. Our video resolution is at 1280x1024 HQ and we found this game to be very playable at frame rates above 40 fps. The servers we connected with were generally showing ping rates around 45ms to 60ms at the time of connection.
We see a very slight frame rate improvement in this game but nothing that was noticeable during game play. It was difficult to tell any differences in game play between each product and as far as we could tell all systems played the game in a similar manner. If we had to make a choice we would choose the NVIDIA nForce 590SLI NIC as it seemed a tad bit smoother in certain areas.
Company of Heroes
Company of Heroes is one of our favorite RTS games around the office. We are playing the Lorraine map in one versus one player mode. Our other test party hosted the game and we found their system configuration to be nearly identical to ours. Our resolution was set to 1280x1024 with all options on high except for AA. This game is very playable with frame rates above 35 fps in multiplayer action.
Bigfoot Networks stated to us early on not to expect any measureable performance differences in the majority of RTS games. Sure enough we did not see any improvements although the Killer NIC did score a little higher than our D-Link solutions. Once again, we did not notice any real differences in game play between any of the products. We actually tried the Killer NIC in APP mode and were greeted with basically the same level of performance.
Rise of Legends
This game was released a few months back and like most real time strategy games is very CPU intensive but still offers a very visual experience. In order to experience the game properly you need a fast CPU, very good memory subsystem, and a decent GPU to play at the higher resolutions. This is one game that seems to have the perfect recipe for the Killer NIC. We are playing the Spire Forest map with Vinci versus Vinci. We generally found the game to be enjoyable with an average frame rate above 40 fps.
Although BigFoot Networks had stated most RTS games will not show any improvements we see a slight increase in frame rates with this game. We have to temper our results with the fact that there was not any noticeable difference in game play between the various products once again. In a blind performance test, any setup could have won for the most enjoyable game play experience.
World of WarCraft
WoW is the largest and probably most enjoyable MMO we have played and is a favorite amongst many of our staff members. This is another title that BigFoot Networks has explicitly stated will show performance improvements and is one that is mentioned in most of their marketing materials. We logged in at several different times that range from Wednesday morning to late night Saturdays to ensure we experienced a wide variety and number of players on the server. We started in the Dalaran Ruins and traveled to the Alterac Valley battlegrounds doing our best to battle the same creatures with each character.
We see about a 4% increase over our other products in frame rates. WoW is basically capped at 64 fps with dual core systems so it is difficult to determine if the Killer NIC would provide any further frame rate increases with our test platform. We have seen increases quoted in the 10% or plus range in this game so we utilized a 3.4GHz P4 in our test bed and noted a 9% increase in frame rates. The Killer NIC gets a point for increasing frame rates as advertised. Of course anything over 35 fps in this game is very playable so the increases while nice did not really improve our game play.
Ping rates did improve by up to 7% (host system improvements and server variables) and this is where we did notice a difference in game play during the busy test sessions on Friday and Saturday nights. When our area was full of players we did notice smoother game play at times with the Killer NIC. This did not happen when we were basically the only characters playing in certain sections. This game is designed to a certain degree for higher ping rates so there is some balancing that is already done by the server during combat. Overall, the Killer NIC performed almost as advertised in this benchmark.
In order to make sure we were not drinking the Snake Oil we did a blind performance test in WoW with a third party. The third party had no idea their on-board NIC had been replaced with the Killer NIC. The first reaction was a question asking if an additional one gigabyte of RAM had been added to the system or if the video card had been changed. This would normally make for very good publicity and we found it slightly amazing that someone would pick up on the differences in performance so quickly. However, this configuration was a dual core CPU based mid-range system and the user would not be one to spend $279.99 on a peripheral other than a new graphics card. If someone had offered them this card for $50 in order to improve their WoW experience they probably would have jumped at it instead of gasping when told the actual price.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
87 Comments
View All Comments
stmok - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
Yeah, I do agree.Its targetting at the wrong crowd. This product should be really for the hardcore enthusiasts. (I'm talking about those who actually use the command line on a regular basis). You don't expect clueless Windows users start tinkering with Linux, do you? :)
As for SLI and Crossfire? Its a bloody joke.
You buy two video cards today, and in 12 months time, they'll be outperformed by a single next generation video card. Yeah, money well spent there, isn't it?
stmok - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
To be honest, if they opened up the specs for the card, and work with the community, you'd have a different product. (So they only focus on selling hardware and advising enthusiasts in how to develop software solutions for the card).yyrkoon - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
So the fact that Intels NIC cards regularly perform better than atleast 99% of the competition, and the fact they have made a PCI-E card is completely lost on you ?BTW the price of the Intel card is FAR less . . .
Zebo - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
It's you who is stupid. Video you get your monies worth unlike this POS, anywhere from 60-75% inprovement moving to that second card in SLI/xfire config.mlau - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
as i said, i think this card is targeted at the wrong crowd. but then i don't doubtthat the windows network stack is a POS and offloading it completely to a piece of
hardware will free the host cpu for other tasks.
as for sli/xfire, performance improvements are almost not noticeable (and sometimes
perf decreases). noone except a few impressionable 12 year olds care about your fps
in fear and other shooters. i play games to be entertained and not to watch the fps
meter and tell my "friends" that "oooo i can play far cry in 2560x1200 8aa16af and still
get 120 fps!!!1!!11oneone, you cant!!". you people are pathetic.
Frumious1 - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
"as for sli/xfire, performance improvements are almost not noticeable"Clearly you have never used a higher end gaming PC on modern title. I can assure that the improvements are VERY noticeable if you play with a larger LCD (even 1920x1200) and want smooth frame rates, or if you even load up Oblivion at moderate resolutions. Yes, an increase from 100 to 170 FPS in some titles is basically meaningless, but going from 20 to 35 FPS in Oblivion makes the difference between sluggish and smooth gameplay. Whether or not it's worth the price is up for debate, but just because you can't afford it and don't play enough games to justify the purchase doesn't make is pathetic.
BTW, I've got news for you moron: 12 year olds are NOT the people running SLI/Crossfire setups! But then your penis envy probably blinds you to that fact. Even in Linux, I doubt this card is worth the price of admission. $280 for another "coprocessor"? Lovely, except in another week or so $250 would add two more CPU cores and make the whole situation meaningless. Now let's just hope Vista has network stack improvements so that mutliple cores are truly useful for offloading audio and network tasks in games. Actually, that's probably at least partially a matter of getting game developers to do things more threaded-like.
Hey Gary, did you test Quake 4 with a non-SMP configuration? I understand Q4 optimizations for SMP essentially consist of running the client and server code in separate threads, so maybe the server is already offloaded and there's nothing new for the Killer to do? Gee why can't other devs do this? Lazy bums!
KAZANI - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
"Whether or not it's worth the price is up for debate, but just because you can't afford it and don't play enough games to justify the purchase doesn't make is pathetic."To my mind going into a 600$ expenditure so that you can play overhyped duds such as Oblivion counts as pathetic. I am still not convinced that it's the heavy gaming that warrants dual-GPU's and not dual-GPU's warranting heavy gaming.
bob661 - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
In MY mind (the ONLY mind that's important), people that criticize others choice in computer hardware and games IS indeed pathetic. I AM convinced that you are as jealous, self-righteous, asshole that probably drives in the left lane on the freeway at the speed limit because no one needs to go faster than the almighty YOU.rushfan2006 - Wednesday, November 1, 2006 - link
Agreed...there is a lot of people being dicks on this thread. I just don't understand it.If you don't like a game or something, just don't buy it - you can make your opinion about it so long as it offers some kind of value -- calling out the performance or problems with the product. But to associate someone's buying choice then calling them names its just gets ridiculous....its like grow the hell up already.
KAZANI - Wednesday, November 1, 2006 - link
Escuse me? You're spending 600$ to play Oblivion and you're telling me to "grow up"? DUDE, YOU NEED TIME OFF THE COMPUTER!