Fallout 3 Analysis

Try as we might, Fallout 3 performance is very limited by LOD optimizations. We tweaked the .ini files as much as we could to make performance GPU limited, but we just shifted maximum performance down across the board. This is similar to how Oblivion behaved with single card solutions, but this time even multiGPU solutions are affected. It's not a failing of the game, as we do recommend turning on vsync and (if possible) triple buffering when gaming; it just makes testing "goodness" of a graphics card more difficult.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600


None of our single GPU options hits the frame limit, which does help. Everything runs fine at 1680x1050 and all the multiGPU options are essentially equivalent in performance at this resolution. Moving up to 1920x1200, we see a similar situation, but the 9800 GX2 starts to fall off a bit. Luckily 2560x1600 offers us a better look at what cards stand up when really pushed by Bethesda's modified Gamebryo engine.

Graphics memory becomes a factor at high resolution, and the multiGPU options with only 512MB per card tank in performance. Both 9800 series options and the 4870 512MB / 4850 CrossFire options drop off sharply in performance. This leaves the 4870 X2 and 4850 X2 solutions in competition with the latest and greatest from NVIDIA at the top of the heap. It's clear that the highest end NVIDIA parts have more headroom still, but unfortunately this test won't reveal everything they can do. The 4850 X2 2GB and GTX 260 SLI do drop a little off the frame limit, but the drop isn't hugely consequential.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600


Scaling data is horrible here because of the limited framerate. Basically, rather than looking at how much better two cards perform, the metric is how slow the single card is. Thus the best scaling we see in this game comes from the 9800 GTX+ and the 4850 until we hit 2560x1600. When we start to finally get a glimpse of real scaling in Fallout 3, the GT200 based NVIDIA cards definitely take the cake.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600


In terms of value, the frame limit also hurts multiGPU solutions because despite the increased cost, you can only squeeze so much performance out of the hardware. Once again, we note though that the 4850 X2 has very good value and good performance especially compared to the single GTX 280 and 285.

Crysis Warhead Analysis FarCry 2 Analysis
Comments Locked

95 Comments

View All Comments

  • MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - link

    So we have to be perfect in every way to point out errors? NBA players shouldn't listen to their coaches because their coaches can't play as well as they do? Game reviewers shouldn't trash a game because they couldn't make a better one?
  • ggathagan - Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - link

    When it comes to grammatical errors as insignificant as the ones pointed out, yes.
    If you're going to be that critical, then you best check your own grammar.
  • cptnjarhead - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link

    Grammar shmammar, you guys need to move out of your mom’s basement and get laid. :)
  • bigboxes - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link

    +1
  • stym - Monday, February 23, 2009 - link

    I am curious to see how a pair of radeon 4830 would perform in this lineup. A single one is quite weak at those resolutions, but I am willing to bet a pair of those would hold its own against a single GTX280.
    Oh, and it would be much cheaper, too ($180 including the bridge).

    Could you possibly include that setup next?
  • DerekWilson - Monday, February 23, 2009 - link

    You are right that a single 4830 won't be enough perform on par with these guys ... but I don't think two of them would really be worth it against the GTX 280 except maybe at lower resolutions. The 1GB 4830 will run you at least $145, so you're looking at $290 for two of them and the 4850 X2 2GB is the same price. The 512MB 4830 will be limited by memory usage at higher resolutions just like the 4850 512MB.

    We might look at the 4830 in CrossFire internally and see if it warrants an update, but so far it isn't in the roadmap for the rest of the series.
  • stym - Monday, February 23, 2009 - link

    I was thinking 512MB 4830s, which are in the $90~$110 price range. That price range is the only reason I mention them, because it puts the price tag of a pair of those in the exact same range as a Radeon 4830 512MB or even a GTX260.

    You said that a 4850 1GB doesn't make sense, and that's even more obvious for a 4830.

  • pmonti80 - Monday, February 23, 2009 - link

    I find too that this would be an interesting match at the $200+ pricetag.
  • wilkinb - Monday, February 23, 2009 - link

    why not just drop AoC, it was bad when it came out, has always had issues and odd results and no one i know played for more then 2 months...

    If you want to have a mmo, why not use one that people play? and maybe even more mature in development...

    I know you will say it adds value, but you dont know its it bad code or showing a different view.
  • ajoyner - Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - link

    Most of the issues with the game are gone. There are currently no other MMO's out there that have the graphics or combat system to tax a gpu like this game. Your comment on testing a game that people play is very subjective. There are many MMO's out there that I would not touch....WOW, cough, cough.....but that doesn't mean other people don't enjoy them. I think having this game as one that is regularly benchmarked adds a great deal of value to the article.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now