Half the Way to the Half-Life 2: Counter Strike: Source Benchmarked

Danhill · Oct 11, 2004, 02:55 AM

We still are waiting for the Half-Life 2 to arrive, but Valve Software holds the wraps on any release details of the game that was supposed to be launched on September 30, 2003. Specially for fans of the world’s most-popular online title, Valve launches the totally redone Counter Strike flavour, the Counter Strike: Source, with new engine, effects and level of realizm, but unfailing immersive gameplay during continuous counter-terrorist raids. But what hardware will you need for the siege?

Read more: X-bit Labs

Dark Lord · Oct 11, 2004, 03:51 AM

well since xbit labs is down right now i cant read the article, but if there doing this benching off of the stress test its worthless. that stress test tells me that ill have an average of 95.96FPS, but in reality ill get more like 75ish. not to mention its almost impossible to hold a steady FPS in that game.

i dont know what valve did but in some spots (mainly T spawn in aztec) they screwed the spec maps up so bad that it lags most people like theres no tomarrow. i know it slows my system down to a crawl and forces the audio to even start slowing down and become distorted and ive got a top of the line rig.

for the most part, the game and engine are great but it needs some tweaking.

Danhill · Oct 11, 2004, 04:28 AM

I'm not sure exactly but I think the tester said that this was a very CPU dependet test as well.

Danhill · Oct 11, 2004, 06:20 AM

It's working now, the link that is.

Seems like both ATI & Nvidia is going to be able to play this game very well.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 11, 2004, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danhill

I'm not sure exactly but I think the tester said that this was a very CPU dependet test as well.

it's not... only on nvidia 6800 cards they've said that

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danhill

It's working now, the link that is.

Seems like both ATI & Nvidia is going to be able to play this game very well.

yes they will especally after nvidia boosted thier FPS up to 40%

in
CS: Sourse in one driver realese since then.. they've been doing pretty well,,,

Danhill · Oct 11, 2004, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

it's not... only on nvidia 6800 cards they've said that

Where did you see that??

I only saw this regarding the CPU perfomance;

Source physics engine requires quite a lot of CPU power and it looks like you definitely should have a powerful system to play the Counter Strike: Source without lags.

Overall I think it's excellent that both cards runs the game well, a few fps here and there is not something you really see with the naked eye.

Sandok · Oct 11, 2004, 08:58 AM

Great... My bro's CPU is laggin and well not good for him (his CPU's sorta thinking it's a 1800+ instead of 2800+ even though the mobo knows who the CPU is (a 2800+))

dipstick · Oct 11, 2004, 09:44 AM

Damn, both gen cards are eating this game up. So much for nVidia falling behind on this one lol. Me likes

Danhill · Oct 11, 2004, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dipstick

Damn, both gen cards are eating this game up. So much for nVidia falling behind on this one lol. Me likes

Yeah it's great, for once both manufactures have almost the same performance.

PoopyTheJ · Oct 11, 2004, 12:16 PM

Alright now that I've got the video card I need a new processor.....

@/2ct!< · Oct 11, 2004, 05:50 PM

Im glad nvidia seems to have risen its performance substantially while iq still seems the same, same with ATI and Doom. As long as you can wait a little, I think both should have similar performance in most games after driver fixes.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 11, 2004, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danhill

Where did you see that??

I only saw this regarding the CPU perfomance;

Source physics engine requires quite a lot of CPU power and it looks like you definitely should have a powerful system to play the Counter Strike: Source without lags.

Overall I think it's excellent that both cards runs the game well, a few fps here and there is not something you really see with the naked eye.

the steam and CS forums, a few people with both cards.... 6800 and x800xt pe
saying that it's more cpu dependanat on how well the 68-- does

I don't own one so I have to rely on those who do for information...
also i seen articals to the effect the 6800 requires alot more cpu useage.... to render video etc...

I have a 9600xt and o/cing my cpu from 2500+ (1.83ghz @ 333mhz bus) to 3200+ (2.2 ghz @ 400mhz bus) I gain 0-1 FPS in my source bechmark scores wich useally inidacates a verry hevely GPU depentant game....

If if was hevaly cpu dependant wouldn't my fps gone up from and extra 66 mhz bus and and extra 400 mhz of cpu power

the only way you can call this game cpu depenatant is if your running a verry slow below normal/adverage CPU and that desn't make it cpu depenatant either.... You can't scale cpu...

the game does scale graphics cards though with dx7/8/9 support to make it ubber compatable and runable on older cards minus the specail affects and IQ each DX level brings

zerodamage · Oct 11, 2004, 09:14 PM

I know that my Athlon 64 3200 Processor with 1-gig of RAM and x800 pro w/ 16 pipes clocked at 500/500 gets very eratic lag compared to the beta with Aztec being unplayable due to massive sound stuttering and massive drops in framerate. I think valve broke something that needs to be fixed.

digerati · Oct 11, 2004, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerodamage

I know that my Athlon 64 3200 Processor with 1-gig of RAM and x800 pro w/ 16 pipes clocked at 500/500 gets very eratic lag compared to the beta with Aztec being unplayable due to massive sound stuttering and massive drops in framerate. I think valve broke something that needs to be fixed.

I'll tell you what needs to be fixed!

They need to put CHICKENS IN ITALY!!

Danhill · Oct 12, 2004, 01:31 AM

I really need a new cpu as well.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Oct 12, 2004, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerodamage

I know that my Athlon 64 3200 Processor with 1-gig of RAM and x800 pro w/ 16 pipes clocked at 500/500 gets very eratic lag compared to the beta with Aztec being unplayable due to massive sound stuttering and massive drops in framerate. I think valve broke something that needs to be fixed.

you and your rig man

DigitalisAkujin · Oct 12, 2004, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ^_^

I'll tell you what needs to be fixed!

They need to put CHICKENS IN ITALY!!

haha agreed, it just isn't the same anymore.....

maybe when bots are enabled they will create a "chicken script" and throw em in

PoopyTheJ · Oct 13, 2004, 04:35 PM

I thought the pro had 12 pipes?

Oct 11, 2004, 02:55 AM	#1
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,116 Rep Power: 0	Half the Way to the Half-Life 2: Counter Strike: Source Benchmarked We still are waiting for the Half-Life 2 to arrive, but Valve Software holds the wraps on any release details of the game that was supposed to be launched on September 30, 2003. Specially for fans of the world’s most-popular online title, Valve launches the totally redone Counter Strike flavour, the Counter Strike: Source, with new engine, effects and level of realizm, but unfailing immersive gameplay during continuous counter-terrorist raids. But what hardware will you need for the siege? Read more: X-bit Labs __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Oct 11, 2004, 04:28 AM	#3
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,116 Rep Power: 0	I'm not sure exactly but I think the tester said that this was a very CPU dependet test as well. __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Oct 11, 2004, 06:20 AM	#4
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,116 Rep Power: 0	It's working now, the link that is. Seems like both ATI & Nvidia is going to be able to play this game very well. __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Oct 11, 2004, 12:16 PM	#10
PoopyTheJ DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,595 Rep Power: 50	Alright now that I've got the video card I need a new processor..... __________________ [COLOR=Blue]“Alright boys, let’s start her up and see why she doesn’t work.” - John Fritz "I aim to misbehave" Malcolm Reynolds ATI Catalyst Beta Tester[/COLOR]

Oct 11, 2004, 05:50 PM	#11
@/2ct!< DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Not Vegas, anymore :( Posts: 1,379 Rep Power: 0	Im glad nvidia seems to have risen its performance substantially while iq still seems the same, same with ATI and Doom. As long as you can wait a little, I think both should have similar performance in most games after driver fixes. __________________ A64 @ 2.45 Ghz, x800xt, l90d+, 1 Gig DDR 400 @222

Oct 11, 2004, 03:51 AM	#2
Dark Lord DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Posts: 5,559 Rep Power: 63 System Specs	well since xbit labs is down right now i cant read the article, but if there doing this benching off of the stress test its worthless. that stress test tells me that ill have an average of 95.96FPS, but in reality ill get more like 75ish. not to mention its almost impossible to hold a steady FPS in that game. i dont know what valve did but in some spots (mainly T spawn in aztec) they screwed the spec maps up so bad that it lags most people like theres no tomarrow. i know it slows my system down to a crawl and forces the audio to even start slowing down and become distorted and ive got a top of the line rig. for the most part, the game and engine are great but it needs some tweaking.

Oct 11, 2004, 08:58 AM	#7
Sandok DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 9,501 Rep Power: 53	Great... My bro's CPU is laggin and well not good for him (his CPU's sorta thinking it's a 1800+ instead of 2800+ even though the mobo knows who the CPU is (a 2800+))

Oct 11, 2004, 09:44 AM	#8
dipstick DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 3,561 Rep Power: 53 System Specs	Damn, both gen cards are eating this game up. So much for nVidia falling behind on this one lol. Me likes

Oct 11, 2004, 09:14 PM	#13
zerodamage DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 3,574 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	I know that my Athlon 64 3200 Processor with 1-gig of RAM and x800 pro w/ 16 pipes clocked at 500/500 gets very eratic lag compared to the beta with Aztec being unplayable due to massive sound stuttering and massive drops in framerate. I think valve broke something that needs to be fixed.

Oct 12, 2004, 01:31 AM	#15
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,116 Rep Power: 0	I really need a new cpu as well. __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Oct 13, 2004, 04:35 PM	#18
PoopyTheJ DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,595 Rep Power: 50	I thought the pro had 12 pipes? __________________ [COLOR=Blue]“Alright boys, let’s start her up and see why she doesn’t work.” - John Fritz "I aim to misbehave" Malcolm Reynolds ATI Catalyst Beta Tester[/COLOR]