• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

CS:Source Beta is OPEN

Stuggernaut

Grandma's Chippy
Is the stress test just something like a 3Dmark benchmark? Or does it just keep track of performance while going all out in the game as you play it?

If it is just a test, it's too bad they don't make it public so people without CS can test their systems :)
 

Kon Tiki

Banned
Mr Pockets said:
Is the stress test just something like a 3Dmark benchmark? Or does it just keep track of performance while going all out in the game as you play it?

If it is just a test, it's too bad they don't make it public so people without CS can test their systems :)


It is like 3dmark. A video was show at a previous e3 (2003?).
 

AeroGod

Member
Yay. Got everything worked out i guess after the crashes. Played some CS:source...awesome. The new physics make the game alot more fun. 55.67 FPS on the stress test....better then I thought.
 

AeroGod

Member
Its great. I never put THAT much time into the old C-S but this is pretty damn fun. The smoke grenades are fantastic. Ive never in my life seen such a useful smoke grenade in a video game. The weapon models are great also.
 

Wario64

works for Gamestop (lol)
Whoa, reloading animation is affected by where you are in the map? That's pretty damn awesome
 

Kon Tiki

Banned
Some more propaganda.

mp2.jpg
 

AeroGod

Member
Wario64 said:
Whoa, reloading animation is affected by where you are in the map? That's pretty damn awesome

Maybe not. I tried to recreate the situation and I couldnt. I swear it happend, though maybe among all the commotion I was seeing and hearing things.
 

Tenguman

Member
Well a little FPS-testing confusion going on now. Driver Heaven posted results where ATI's flagship card beats Nvidia's flagship by almost 50% in some tests in this video-stress test.

However, people with Nvidia 6800s not affliated with a website have posted scores much closer to ATI's scores even with WEAKER CPU's than Driver-Heaven.....putting Driver Heaven's stuff in doubt.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=795908&page=8

We'll see when Hardocp or Anandtech post their own scores.
 

Stryder

Member
My rig :

P4 2.8@3.7
1gig DDR400
6800 GT @ 420/1.10

My results :
css_video_test.jpg


This is at 1600x1200 8xAF 6xAA

Yes, I'm looking forward to HL2, this is one of the main reasons why I have this machine ;)
 

B'z-chan

Banned
Ok so get Counter Strike CZ and you get in? And its going to be going on all the way through HL2's release? If so i might just have to find CSCZ for really cheap.
 
1.jpg


XP 3000 (400fsb)
Gig of DDR 3200 in dual channel
Nforce 2 mobo/chipset
Raedeon 9800 Pro 128
Windows XP Pro SP1
direct X 9.0b
Catalyst 4.8 drivers



HL2 > Doom3/far cry performance


JUST BRING IT! /rock
 

Drexon

Banned
ZombieSupaStar said:
1.jpg


XP 3000 (400fsb)
Gig of DDR 3200 in dual channel
Nforce 2 mobo/chipset
Raedeon 9800 Pro 128
Windows XP Pro SP1
direct X 9.0b
Catalyst 4.8 drivers



HL2 > Doom3/far cry performance


JUST BRING IT! /rock
Sweeeet! :D I'll have that, except a AMD64 3000+ instead, so I'm set. =)
 

Drexon

Banned
:( :( :( I keep getting a lot of artifacts.. small white dots all over the place. What's wrong? :(

Anyways, I tested the stress test on my current comp...

AMD XP 1600+
256 SDRAM
Radeon 9800 Pro

~44 FPS.
 
also there seem to be a SHITLOAD of people getting crash to desktops when joining a server Ive had it happen to me about 50% of the time and the steam forums are a battle royal of "Fix" threads



arnt betas awesome? :p
 
ingame i was playing on 1024x768, with everything set to high and it ran reasonably smooth dropping down to below 30fps when a firefight was happening, stuck everything to medium and it rarely goes below 40fps

yay :D
 

shibbs

Member
crawlingpeter said:
i got ~86 on this:

2100+ OC'd to 2400+
1 gig 2700
9800 pro

by the way, cs:s is very beautiful and immersive.

Hmm i guess i should get around 60 then. Not bad i guess.

Drexon said:
:( :( :( I keep getting a lot of artifacts.. small white dots all over the place. What's wrong? :(

Anyways, I tested the stress test on my current comp...

AMD XP 1600+
256 SDRAM
Radeon 9800 Pro

~44 FPS.

What resolution are you running it at?
 

Drexon

Banned
shibbs said:
What resolution are you running it at?
I haven't changed it, so 1024 I guess. I found out that my chassis temp was pretty high, haven't had a decent gfx card in a while, so that's probably the cause.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
Screw it, I just bought CZ off steam. Downloading CS:Source now ;b

I don't mind throwing my money away if it's for a worthy cause (Valve's domination of the PC FPS market).
 

TheQueen'sOwn

insert blank space here
HAH! They took away the crates in the corner (as seen in the pic above). I hated that one spot because the noobs would always hide in that corner and I would have to wait near the end of a round as other noobs searched for the noob in the corner lol.

Lukas said:
those graphics look like complete ass

Yeah. The trees don't look too good :(. That's gonna ruin the game for me.
 

epmode

Member
Stryder said:
My rig :

P4 2.8@3.7
1gig DDR400
6800 GT @ 420/1.10

My results :
css_video_test.jpg


This is at 1600x1200 8xAF 6xAA

Yes, I'm looking forward to HL2, this is one of the main reasons why I have this machine ;)
awesome. i was worried that the 6800 gt might have a little trouble with the super-high video settings.. i'm feeling better about my card, now. (i originally wanted an x800 xt or a 6800 ultra, but they just weren't available)
 

zooL

Member
Drexon said:
:( :( :( I keep getting a lot of artifacts.. small white dots all over the place. What's wrong? :(

You sure the small white dots you mean aren't the dust-particles which fly through the air in the hallway in dust?
 

IJoel

Member
For those with the 9600XT, I spent a little time with the Stress Test. We should do this with each card, compile them and make the Ultimate GA HL2 Benchmarks. Considering my hardware specs, since my bottleneck is the actual video card, this represents a good gauge for the performance with an ATI 9600XT card.

Anyway, here are my PC Specifications:
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ / 1GB DDR PC-3200 / ATI 9600XT / Catalyst 4.9 Beta Drivers

All the benchmarks were done with the following base configuration:

Resolution: 1024x768 resolution
Texture Detail: High
Model Detail: High
Water Detail: Reflect World
Shadow Detail: High

Code:
   AA      AF    Avg FPS
---------------------------------------
6xAA   16xAF   26.41
6xAA    8xAF   26.42
6xAA    4xAF   26.94
6xAA    2xAF   28.16
6xAA    TriF   29.30
6xAA     BiF   29.09

4xAA   16xAF   28.29
4xAA    8xAF   28.72
4xAA    4xAF   29.18
4xAA    2xAF   30.53
4xAA    TriF   31.62
4xAA     BiF   31.93

2xAA   16xAF   29.86
2xAA    8xAF   30.51
2xAA    4xAF   31.13
2xAA    2xAF   32.62
2xAA    TriF   34.40
2xAA     BiF   34.30

0xAA   16xAF   47.69
0xAA    8xAF   48.67
0xAA    4xAF   50.58
0xAA    2xAF   55.08
0xAA    TriF   59.45
0xAA     BiF   59.79

AA = Anti-Aliasing
AF = Anisotropic Filtering
TriF = Trilinear Filtering
BiF = Bilinear Filtering
 

bob_arctor

Tough_Smooth
Oh jeez, I had no idea about this. I went through a stage where all I did was CS all day every day for about 8 months--literally about 7-10 hours a day on average when I was unemployed (and child-less). Looks like the addiction is going to start all over again. *Sigh* Will I definitely need a high-end rig for this? I don't know my specs but my rig's definitely outdated by now--got a GeForce MX 440 currently...
 
V

Vennt

Unconfirmed Member
Hmm, heres my benchmarking run results, something not quite right about either your results, or my results IJoel, you should be creaming me with that CPU, also I show the same similarity between Bilinear & Trilinear results, leading me to believe one or the other isn't implemented.

My PC Specifications:
AMD Athlon XP 2500+ @ 1.8 Ghz / 1GB DDR PC-2700 / ATI 9600XT "Fireblade" / Catalyst 4.8 Official Drivers

All the benchmarks were done with the following base configuration:

Resolution: 1024x768 resolution
Texture Detail: High
Model Detail: High
Water Detail: Reflect World
Shadow Detail: High

Code:
6xAA   16xAF   35.37
6xAA    8xAF   35.96
6xAA    4xAF   37.31
6xAA    2xAF   38.43
6xAA    TriF   40.82
6xAA     BiF   40.70

4xAA   16xAF   38.99
4xAA    8xAF   40.15
4xAA    4xAF   41.76
4xAA    2xAF   43.57
4xAA    TriF   46.32
4xAA     BiF   46.96

2xAA   16xAF   42.99
2xAA    8xAF   43.20
2xAA    4xAF   45.21
2xAA    2xAF   48.05
2xAA    TriF   52.07
2xAA     BiF   51.55

0xAA   16xAF   50.50
0xAA    8xAF   51.14
0xAA    4xAF   54.17
0xAA    2xAF   56.97
0xAA    TriF   62.74
0xAA     BiF   61.18

AA = Anti-Aliasing
AF = Anisotropic Filtering
TriF = Trilinear Filtering
BiF = Bilinear Filtering

Looks like it's going to be 2xAA, Trilinear filtering for me with this PC.
 

IJoel

Member
Freeburn said:
Hmm, heres my benchmarking run results, something not quite right about either your results, or my results IJoel, you should be creaming me with that CPU, also I show the same similarity between Bilinear & Trilinear results, leading me to believe one or the other isn't implemented.

Hmmm... I guess the 4.9 Beta Catalyst drivers are screwing my performance. I'll try the 4.8 ones tonight.
 

TheQueen'sOwn

insert blank space here
Freeburn said:
My PC Specifications:
AMD Athlon XP 2500+ @ 1.8 Ghz / 1GB DDR PC-2700 / ATI 9600XT "Fireblade" / Catalyst

Sweet! Looks like I'll get some good results then with:
AMD Athlon XP 2500+ @ 1.8 Ghz/ 1GB RD RAM/ ATI 9800 Pro

I should just change my drivers to the official 4.8s instead of the beta 4.9s.
 
Top Bottom