What is Digg?31 Comments
- inactive, on 12/12/2007, -0/+13UT 3 is a beautiful game.
- ferrariman60, on 12/12/2007, -0/+8And also, I'll save you the effort. PC wins: higher res, higher detail textures, higher frames (locked at ~60 fps) and FSAA on Nvidia 8 series. Games are much more GPU oriented than CPU these days. There may be a shift, and I'm all for multi-threaded games, but it isn't happening yet, at least not to the point where an 8 core CPU with a GeForce 7900 will beat high end hardware on a PC.
- SaxxonPike, on 12/12/2007, -0/+8Don't benchmarks require some sort of constant?
- mojaam, on 12/12/2007, -1/+7Nice, now I can build a much needed new system around this. The Unreal series is a blast!
- nirav72, on 12/12/2007, -1/+6IMO.UT3 bots are some of the most capable bots in any game out there. Not smart as in tactically cunning. But they do kick some ass.
- CamZak, on 12/12/2007, -0/+4Slap me stupid, but wouldn't you be able to notice if the PS3 say...dips below 30fps? Find the number of bots it takes for that to happen and viola, benchmark.
- gothsquirrel, on 12/12/2007, -1/+5It runs on my machine but damn if it doesn't look like I'm getting shot at by a fire hydrant. Guess it's time to upgrade.
- benitojuarez, on 12/12/2007, -0/+4I realize its easy to be an ***** behind the anonymity of the internet but don't you think you're overdoing it? A simple click of the red thumbs down will do.
- krische, on 12/12/2007, -1/+4Hmm, wonder if you could run this on the PS3 version. Then benchmark a PS3 vs. PC. Would be neat.
- wafflesomd, on 12/12/2007, -1/+3The UT3 engine is so damn flexible.
- cybrguy, on 12/12/2007, -2/+4As a UT fan, I'm dissapointed in UT3, all they took away from the game, and some of the things they changed were steps backwards in many minds. Unlike when UT2k4 was released, UT3s movement and feel is not so unique. Only the demo is being played at local lans, no one likes it enough to buy it yet. And these locals are people who were crazy for Unreal, UT99 and UT2k4. Even at the 500 man regional lan, the game didn't really have a warm welcome among the competative UT players except by a few like LSD-God.
- volacide, on 12/12/2007, -0/+2You mean like how every PS3 has the same hardware inside of it? Then you could compare the performance within the PS3 with the general performance of hardware on a PC and compare image quality too.
In all honesty though, there aren't a whole lot of settings in UT3 so that alone would make it easier. - h4mx0r, on 12/12/2007, -1/+3You're missing the point of this article. The more UT3 can handle as "eye candy" while keeping playability and stability for a wide range of systems, the better our gaming future is. The U3 Engine is being widely utilized by all sorts of games. If UT3 can prove its own engine's flexibility and stability, then this is what more future games may license and use. Obvious competitors include the Source Engine and the Crytek engine, both also sporting 'eye candy'.
- Rippleeffect, on 12/12/2007, -1/+3Decent article. Would love the site more if I didn't have to click next so many times.
- takeo1775, on 12/12/2007, -1/+3I want game developers to completely remove Bot limits, imagine playing UT2004 with 200 bots for example. They should be scalable to meet future hardware at least... not stuck at 24 bots in UT3 (changing next patch I believe)
- ferrariman60, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1With a new system you'll be able to enjoy crysis too..... bonus!
- inactive, on 12/12/2007, -2/+3What a shocker. A $4000 machine beats a $400 one.
- iamaelephant, on 12/12/2007, -1/+2Would be cool if they did a benchmark with equipment normal students can afford.
- benitojuarez, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1You cant compare, the ps3s framerate for UT3 is locked at 30fps, it cannot go higher.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/12/2007, -0/+1You can't compare the PS3 version because the code is likely different on PS3 version, and the Shaders are most certainly rewritten.
If you compare the two, you have to assume that they ported the game perfectly. Which is impossible.
In the same way I could say they aren't the same game, they're just very similar. - Ranneko, on 12/13/2007, -0/+1Hey, be fair, a PC decked out with that kind of stuff is $2000 at most, unless you are looking for it in a laptop.
- ferrariman60, on 12/22/2007, -0/+1Actually, a PC that would run that would probably be little over $1000, monitor not included. Multicore procs are cheap these days, 8800GT can take all comers for ~$240. It wouldn't be too pricey, man. Relative to what you get.
- Ben1220, on 03/14/2008, -0/+1Yeah I agree I don't like it as much as UT original and 2004, too bad UT2004 stutters bad with Nvidia 8 series cards
- cybrguy, on 12/12/2007, -2/+2LOL a decent PC should monkeystomp a PS3, but bear in mind, a decent pc would cost 2-3 times more than a PS3 so this makes some sense. The fact that they limit the FPS to 30 says half of it right there. But I agree completely, I would love to see a direct comparison.
- nireus, on 12/06/2008, -0/+0Good article.
http://sxe.oyunalemi.com - hockey, on 12/12/2007, -1/+1I haven't had a chance to look at the entire article yet (I just skimmed it). I saw they used vista ultimate. Did anyone see if it was 32 bit or 64 bit (my guess would be 32 bit since they used 2 GB of RAM)?
- chedabob, on 12/12/2007, -5/+3Who gives a *****?
- vengefuldrx, on 12/12/2007, -4/+1And I ask, who cares?
- SpickSlayer, on 12/12/2007, -5/+0A blast...from the past!
- crackah, on 12/12/2007, -11/+5meh! UT 3 is no different to any of the others. Really not into it that much. Just eye candy.
- benitojuarez, on 12/12/2007, -15/+3Heres my results http://home.comcast.net/~benitojuarezxl/Launch.log
I can't seem to find where the avg fps is according to fraps it was in the 50's and 60's I have vista 64bit, a Q6600 @ 2.4ghz, 4gb ram truncated to 3325mb; see http://tinyurl.com/2vjhog if you REALLY want to know why, and a 640mb 8800 GTS running whatever the latest drivers at nivida.com are from like 2-3 days ago.
I did have an asston of stuff running in the background, 76 processes according to task manager. and the res was set to 1280x1024, that seems to be the highest res my hp monitor can support. Oh yeah btw that ip address in there is a hamachi ip so if you want to try and mess around with it have at it.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is