DghelneshiAims to surpass Fana in post edits.Join Date: 2011-11-01Member: 130634Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
edited August 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1966513:date=Aug 25 2012, 12:09 AM:name=Soul_Rider)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Soul_Rider @ Aug 25 2012, 12:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1966513"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Recorded all the data, but i cannot for the life of me get a table created without bloody open office crashing and burning, too many lines of data! If anyone can tell me how to get a chart created without crashing my system, please let me know :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Make a Lua mod for Spark that displays a csv file with fancy shader effects in 3d :P
Build: 217 Resolution: 1680 x 1050 Vsync: Off Ping: ~75 ms
(ignoring readyroom, while dead, and an occasional glitch)
Game 1 Minimum FPS: 30 Maximum FPS: 69 Average FPS: 50
Game 2 Minimum FPS: 25 Maximum FPS: 72 Average FPS: 51
So, overall about +5fps over my previous results. Looking at the graphs though, the amount of time spent near the minimum values was much less, so, even if I didn't gain that much fps it is much steadier.
I seem to have similar performance increases. While they seem minimal on the average FPS front (also around 5 fps increase), frame rate overall seems much more stable, and spends much less time around the lowest FPS marks.
For reference <!--quoteo(post=1963937:date=Aug 16 2012, 03:29 PM:name=Imbalanxd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Imbalanxd @ Aug 16 2012, 03:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1963937"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->CPU: i7 2630QM GPU: GTX460M OS: Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit RAM: 8GB Minimum FPS: 12 Maximum FPS: 50 Average FPS: 27 Build: 216 Resolution: 1900x1200 Ping: 180 ms
Here the data from a friend. 20min playing wasn't possible with this FPS. It got worse in 217.
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 2.4GHz GPU: GeForce GT440 OS: Windows 7 Professional 32 Bit RAM: 2GB Minimum FPS: 6 Maximum FPS: 35 Average FPS: 15.9 Build: 217 Resolution: 1280x960 Ping: 74 ms Detail: Everything OFF MultiThreading: ON
Soul_RiderMod BeanJoin Date: 2004-06-19Member: 29388Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited August 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1966541:date=Aug 25 2012, 01:21 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Aug 25 2012, 01:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1966541"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Soul, upload your spreadsheets and I will make a quick graph for you. Your average FPS is actually lower than mine (as you would expect), did you just think that it would be higher than that?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know my avg fps is lower than yours, but my resolution is 1920x1080, yours is lower, and I tested on Mineshaft. I game with Medium details, you with Low.
Your graphics card is also superior to mine by quite some margin in comparison tables as is your CPU, with more cache, more cores etc and yet, your score is not very much better than mine. To my mind your system is massively underperforming...
Here is the link to the benchmarks for the table, maybe I should do some new ones for build 217 as people are seeming to get much better scores now?
Min is lower than your score, but max is higher, avg is lower. This shows my system fluctuates more wildly than yours, but there is no way mine should have a higher FPS than you at any time, on any of those metrics.
I think you'll need to post the link(s) to the actual files. I don't have a dropbox account so it won't let me access them.
Here is another benchmark I done today on 217: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=120498&view=findpost&p=1969343" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1969343</a>
After turning my resolution down (and OCing to 4ghz again) I gained about 10fps. My graphics card seemed to be a bottleneck as overclocking from 3 to 4ghz had no effect at 1680x1050. It would be nice to see your performance results at a lower resolution Soul. I don't think my system is massively under performing, although I wish you were right as that would mean I could potentially get a big boost. If you look at Dghelneshi's benchmark he gets almost the same average fps as me (now that I put my resolution down) and yet he has one of the best PCs you can buy today. I don't think looking at the average fps is the best way to judge performance though. If you look at his frametimes they are pretty consistent while mine are very erratic and spiking high often. This gives you an idea that on my end there is hitching going on that isn't apparent by just looking at the fps numbers.
Soul_RiderMod BeanJoin Date: 2004-06-19Member: 29388Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited August 2012
217 has made the game almost unplayable as it seems. Too many details, my game keeps crapping out with out of video memory errors. I just played 2 rounds of gathers and it was diabolical. I have an Nvidia, so it's probably related to the other nvidia issues that have arisen in this patch.
My mods are fine though, weirdly enough, although they don't use anywhere near the resources that NS2 does...
Here's the fps graph for you: I just used google docs as it's easy to share the file, perhaps you can try that instead of open office. Be warned though, making graphs is a pain with all the loading times.
I was unable to use frapz as it just made my gameplay worst. However if i recall there has been some beta's where my gameplay has been very playable and then there has been others where its makes me delete Natural-Selection 2 and forget about it. If any more info is required please either pm me or e-mail me i'd be happy to give your more info.
Cheers NX-Wolf
P.S Oh BTW my laptop plays BF3 Fine on Mid to High Settings so i dont know if its the game thats having trouble with my hardware or not. Also you might want to check to see what the staff at UWE Have in terms of hardware. Maybe its just a ati thing :P Love the game just cannot wait for it to play properly on my system even though it might a laptop :).
matsoMaster of PatchesJoin Date: 2002-11-05Member: 7000Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, Squad Five Gold, Reinforced - Shadow, NS2 Community Developer
edited September 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1974251:date=Sep 9 2012, 03:12 AM:name=NX Wolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NX Wolf @ Sep 9 2012, 03:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1974251"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right i've just read a couple of post's and is it me or is the game just getting more and more unplayable every time they bring out a patch??<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, Max has been adding more capable rendering code the last few patches (reflection, bloom etc), which I believe is on by default.
So if you are rendering limited, you might have gotten worse performance the last few patches.
Try this: get into a reasonably sized game, get to a nice area with lots of stuff and players around you, then turn on net_stats in the console (or use Fraps) to see your fps. Open the option screen and minimize the graphics options, then turn them on one by one and watch your fps. Leave off the ones that gives you a drop.
<!--quoteo(post=1969403:date=Aug 31 2012, 10:46 PM:name=Soul_Rider)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Soul_Rider @ Aug 31 2012, 10:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1969403"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->217 has made the game almost unplayable as it seems. Too many details, my game keeps crapping out with out of video memory errors. I just played 2 rounds of gathers and it was diabolical. I have an Nvidia, so it's probably related to the other nvidia issues that have arisen in this patch.
My mods are fine though, weirdly enough, although they don't use anywhere near the resources that NS2 does...
Updated the links direct to the files..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is interesting though, since I've seen alot of topics about Nvidia cards crashing recently in World of WarCraft and Guild Wars 2... Smells like they're on a spree right now. I'm having huge problems with all three games, NS2 being one of them. But I'm gonna get a new card soon, so we'll see. Also my gpu is a tad overclocked, so I'm still tinkering with that.
DghelneshiAims to surpass Fana in post edits.Join Date: 2011-11-01Member: 130634Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=1974249:date=Sep 9 2012, 03:10 AM:name=NX Wolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NX Wolf @ Sep 9 2012, 03:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1974249"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>Visual Quality</b>: High (With Multi Core Turned off aswell as that rendering texture experiment)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Just a note: Multi core rendering <b>improves</b> your performance at no visual cost.
Based on past forum posts, I've found that NS2 is *very* CPU heavy. Specifically, it's more or less pegged to your clock speed and doesn't necessarily take full advantage of all CPU cores. (Very few games actually do, as it's very difficult to program for multiple cores)
I have a GTS 250 (nearly 3 year old video card) and get very similar framerates (+/- 10) between low, medium, and high quality. However, the advanced features do impact performance across the board, like atmospherics, anti-aliasing, and bloom.
Without benchmarking, here's about what I get: 25 FPS avg, 8 min, ~70 max (in ReadyRoom and start of round). Long games universally dip into the teens for me.
<!--quoteo(post=1981024:date=Sep 20 2012, 02:01 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Sep 20 2012, 02:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1981024"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wow, a 3570k @5.0GHz! What kind of cooler are you using?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A custom watercooling setup, nothing special.
Swifttech Apogee XT waterblock, Swiftech MCP35X pump and 2x BlackIce GTX120 Radiators, again nothing special.
<a href="http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718026" target="_blank">I did remove the IHS from the CPU though, I got a 20c drop in temps by removing it.</a>
Swifttech Apogee XT waterblock, Swiftech MCP35X pump and 2x BlackIce GTX120 Radiators, again nothing special.
<a href="http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718026" target="_blank">I did remove the IHS from the CPU though, I got a 20c drop in temps by removing it.</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That makes much more sense. But holy damn, 1.5v on IB? That thing must be sucking up power like it going out of style.
<!--quoteo(post=1981106:date=Sep 20 2012, 05:19 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Sep 20 2012, 05:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1981106"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That makes much more sense. But holy damn, 1.5v on IB? That thing must be sucking up power like it going out of style.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well its better than before. I had a 2500k @ 5ghz too.
GTX 260 Phenom II X3 @2.8ghz 4gb RAM Windows 7 x64 Resolution: 1680x1050
Much better than alpha builds I use to play in! I use to average around 15-20fps. Those drops you see on the graph I was messing with keys and it took a second to load the menu for some reason causing a huge fps drop. The 902-1028 drop was a huge firefight between onos and exos in the hive, so some performance increase is still needed around buildings and end-game. Game seems to have improved alot on performance, this was with everything on and high texture at about 18 minutes of playtime(normally I will probably lower to medium to fix that). I would consider my PC average easily at this point(not so when I bought it lol being about 6 years old). I find it odd my FPS seems to be even or sometimes better than some of these others posted with better processors and video cards considering how outdated my PC is. Obviously it's something wrong with drivers or AMD is just superior to Intel lol. I hope to upgrade soon and am second guessing going Intel like I thought I would, but still very playable :D.
Another, same settings and server as my last post benchmark. That plateau in the FPS at about the 3/4 mark was because I was afk for a couple mins, match didn't end.
Sadly we got dominated by inv.Joe and his fade skills, I think he was 47 and 7.
Conclusion: FPS is a lot more stable without a doubt, hardly falling below 30 FPS. Whereas in b223, it would fall to 20 FPS quite frequently. These benchmarks were held on two different servers/maps, but both servers provided a good ping and player count was similar (18~). The same Visual Detail was used for both. I'm pleasantly surprised by the netcode changes and optimizations put into place to allow such a stable frame rate, but alas, a steady 60 FPS probably won't be feasible without a recent Intel CPU. Perhaps further optimizations past release will yield an average 60 FPS for AMD CPU owners, but the underwhelming single-threaded performance of the newly-released Vishera CPUs provides a bleak future for AMD users. Intel CPUs will continue to have an FPS advantage over Deneb, Thuban, Bulldozer, Piledriver, and most likely even Steamroller. Speaking of i5, my 3570k and new components have just arrived, and I expect my mind to be blown completely. :)
Comments
Make a Lua mod for Spark that displays a csv file with fancy shader effects in 3d :P
CPU: Intel Core i3-2120 @ 3.3Ghz
Ram: 8 GB DDR3 1333
GFX Card: AMD 6870 1Gb
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
Build: 217
Resolution: 1680 x 1050
Vsync: Off
Ping: ~75 ms
(ignoring readyroom, while dead, and an occasional glitch)
Game 1
Minimum FPS: 30
Maximum FPS: 69
Average FPS: 50
Game 2
Minimum FPS: 25
Maximum FPS: 72
Average FPS: 51
So, overall about +5fps over my previous results. Looking at the graphs though, the amount of time spent near the minimum values was much less, so, even if I didn't gain that much fps it is much steadier.
For reference
<!--quoteo(post=1963937:date=Aug 16 2012, 03:29 PM:name=Imbalanxd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Imbalanxd @ Aug 16 2012, 03:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1963937"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->CPU: i7 2630QM
GPU: GTX460M
OS: Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit
RAM: 8GB
Minimum FPS: 12
Maximum FPS: 50
Average FPS: 27
Build: 216
Resolution: 1900x1200
Ping: 180 ms
<img src="https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6250985/fpsNS.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And in build 217
Min: 17
Max: 61
Avg: 32.3
<img src="https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6250985/fpsNS2.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 2.4GHz
GPU: GeForce GT440
OS: Windows 7 Professional 32 Bit
RAM: 2GB
Minimum FPS: 6
Maximum FPS: 35
Average FPS: 15.9
Build: 217
Resolution: 1280x960
Ping: 74 ms
Detail: Everything OFF
MultiThreading: ON
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/WPWVM.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
I know my avg fps is lower than yours, but my resolution is 1920x1080, yours is lower, and I tested on Mineshaft. I game with Medium details, you with Low.
Your graphics card is also superior to mine by quite some margin in comparison tables as is your CPU, with more cache, more cores etc and yet, your score is not very much better than mine. To my mind your system is massively underperforming...
<a href="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/ns2%202012-08-24%2023-25-53-64%20fps.csv" target="_blank">http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/...53-64%20fps.csv</a>
<a href="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/ns2%202012-08-24%2023-25-53-64%20frametimes.csv" target="_blank">http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/...0frametimes.csv</a>
<a href="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/ns2%202012-08-24%2023-25-53-64%20minmaxavg.csv" target="_blank">http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64659735/benchies/...20minmaxavg.csv</a>
Here is the link to the benchmarks for the table, maybe I should do some new ones for build 217 as people are seeming to get much better scores now?
Min is lower than your score, but max is higher, avg is lower. This shows my system fluctuates more wildly than yours, but there is no way mine should have a higher FPS than you at any time, on any of those metrics.
Here is another benchmark I done today on 217: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=120498&view=findpost&p=1969343" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1969343</a>
After turning my resolution down (and OCing to 4ghz again) I gained about 10fps. My graphics card seemed to be a bottleneck as overclocking from 3 to 4ghz had no effect at 1680x1050. It would be nice to see your performance results at a lower resolution Soul. I don't think my system is massively under performing, although I wish you were right as that would mean I could potentially get a big boost. If you look at Dghelneshi's benchmark he gets almost the same average fps as me (now that I put my resolution down) and yet he has one of the best PCs you can buy today. I don't think looking at the average fps is the best way to judge performance though. If you look at his frametimes they are pretty consistent while mine are very erratic and spiking high often. This gives you an idea that on my end there is hitching going on that isn't apparent by just looking at the fps numbers.
My mods are fine though, weirdly enough, although they don't use anywhere near the resources that NS2 does...
Updated the links direct to the files..
<a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Amc4JMsdiBcBdFBxQjVGelRVSjNUdVRwaHBDTW5NZFE&output=html" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key...amp;output=html</a>
GPU: GeForce GTX 670
OS: Windows 7 Professional, 64 Bit
RAM: 32GB
Minimum FPS: 0
Maximum FPS: 69
Average FPS: 39
Build: 217
Resolution: 1920x1080
GPU: GeForce GTX 485m
OS: Windows 7 Professional, 32 Bit
RAM: 4GB
Minimum FPS: 15
Maximum FPS: 35
Average FPS: 22
Build: 217
Resolution: 1920x1080, everything maxed/enabled
Regards
GTX 570 (1.25 GB VRAM)
Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
4 GB RAM
Minimum: 18 FPS
Maximum: 82 FPS
Average: 38 FPS
Build 217
1600 x 900
Ping 80~ ms
<b>Alienware M15x
ATI 5850 1GB GDDR5
8GB RAM
Intel i5 520M 2.40GHz
Windows 7 64Bit
500GB SSD Hybrid </b>
<!--sizeo:5--><span style="font-size:18pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><u><b>Game Benchmark High Setting:</b></u><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
<b>
Max FPS:</b> 19
<b>Min FPS:</b> 1
<b>Avg Fps:</b> 16
<b>Resolution:</b> 1600x900
<b>Visual Quality</b>: High (With Multi Core Turned off aswell as that rendering texture experiment)
<b>Max Ping:</b> 89
<b>Min Ping:</b> 73
<b>Avg Ping:</b> 76
<b>Connection:</b> 100Meg Virgin Media (hard wired btw)
<b>Version:</b> Beta 218
<!--sizeo:5--><span style="font-size:18pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><u><b>Game Benchmark Low Setting:</b></u><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
<!--sizeo:4--><span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><u><b>Same Server</b></u><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
<b>
Max FPS:</b> 33
<b>Min FPS:</b> 11
<b>Avg Fps:</b> 23
I was unable to use frapz as it just made my gameplay worst. However if i recall there has been some beta's where my gameplay has been very playable and then there has been others where its makes me delete Natural-Selection 2 and forget about it. If any more info is required please either pm me or e-mail me i'd be happy to give your more info.
Cheers NX-Wolf
P.S Oh BTW my laptop plays BF3 Fine on Mid to High Settings so i dont know if its the game thats having trouble with my hardware or not. Also you might want to check to see what the staff at UWE Have in terms of hardware. Maybe its just a ati thing :P Love the game just cannot wait for it to play properly on my system even though it might a laptop :).
Actually, Max has been adding more capable rendering code the last few patches (reflection, bloom etc), which I believe is on by default.
So if you are rendering limited, you might have gotten worse performance the last few patches.
Try this: get into a reasonably sized game, get to a nice area with lots of stuff and players around you, then turn on net_stats in the console (or use Fraps) to see your fps. Open the option screen and minimize the graphics options, then turn them on one by one and watch your fps. Leave off the ones that gives you a drop.
Might help.
For me it seems to got even worse, I get a lot more of very low fps in combat (just played on HBZ3):
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/D6YnF.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
My mods are fine though, weirdly enough, although they don't use anywhere near the resources that NS2 does...
Updated the links direct to the files..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is interesting though, since I've seen alot of topics about Nvidia cards crashing recently in World of WarCraft and Guild Wars 2... Smells like they're on a spree right now. I'm having huge problems with all three games, NS2 being one of them. But I'm gonna get a new card soon, so we'll see. Also my gpu is a tad overclocked, so I'm still tinkering with that.
Just a note: Multi core rendering <b>improves</b> your performance at no visual cost.
I have a GTS 250 (nearly 3 year old video card) and get very similar framerates (+/- 10) between low, medium, and high quality. However, the advanced features do impact performance across the board, like atmospherics, anti-aliasing, and bloom.
Without benchmarking, here's about what I get: 25 FPS avg, 8 min, ~70 max (in ReadyRoom and start of round). Long games universally dip into the teens for me.
1920x1080 all settings on high/on.
Consistently above 60fps, pwnage.
Consistently above 60fps, pwnage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wow, a 3570k @5.0GHz! What kind of cooler are you using?
A custom watercooling setup, nothing special.
Swifttech Apogee XT waterblock, Swiftech MCP35X pump and 2x BlackIce GTX120 Radiators, again nothing special.
<a href="http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718026" target="_blank">I did remove the IHS from the CPU though, I got a 20c drop in temps by removing it.</a>
Swifttech Apogee XT waterblock, Swiftech MCP35X pump and 2x BlackIce GTX120 Radiators, again nothing special.
<a href="http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718026" target="_blank">I did remove the IHS from the CPU though, I got a 20c drop in temps by removing it.</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That makes much more sense. But holy damn, 1.5v on IB? That thing must be sucking up power like it going out of style.
Well its better than before. I had a 2500k @ 5ghz too.
5ghz 3570k @ 1.52vcore ~170w
5ghz 2500k @ 1.52vcore ~200w
<a href="http://extreme.outervision.com/tools.jsp" target="_blank">http://extreme.outervision.com/tools.jsp</a>
Min FPS: 0
Max: 65
AVG: 40.698
Ping: 60 avg
Specs:
GTX 260
Phenom II X3 @2.8ghz
4gb RAM
Windows 7 x64
Resolution: 1680x1050
Much better than alpha builds I use to play in! I use to average around 15-20fps. Those drops you see on the graph I was messing with keys and it took a second to load the menu for some reason causing a huge fps drop. The 902-1028 drop was a huge firefight between onos and exos in the hive, so some performance increase is still needed around buildings and end-game. Game seems to have improved alot on performance, this was with everything on and high texture at about 18 minutes of playtime(normally I will probably lower to medium to fix that). I would consider my PC average easily at this point(not so when I bought it lol being about 6 years old). I find it odd my FPS seems to be even or sometimes better than some of these others posted with better processors and video cards considering how outdated my PC is. Obviously it's something wrong with drivers or AMD is just superior to Intel lol. I hope to upgrade soon and am second guessing going Intel like I thought I would, but still very playable :D.
Sadly we got dominated by inv.Joe and his fade skills, I think he was 47 and 7.
<img src="http://donaldleatherwood.com/temp/ns2221.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Just curious as I was looking at replacing my overclocked Q6600 with one of those CPU's.
CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 830 @ 3.8GHz
GPU: PNY GTX 460 1 GB @ 800/900/1600
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate, 64 Bit
RAM: G.SKILL Sniper 2x 4GB, 1600 MHz
Display Mode: Fullscreen
Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Visual Detail: High (Ambient Occlusion = Medium)
Ping: 50-60~ ms
Build 223:
<img src="http://i48.tinypic.com/33y40af.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Time: 28.2 minutes
Min: 11
Max: 60
Avg: 33.201
Build 224:
<img src="http://i50.tinypic.com/33xeich.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Time: 32.4 minutes
Min: 22
Max: 63
Avg: 38.789
Conclusion: FPS is a lot more stable without a doubt, hardly falling below 30 FPS. Whereas in b223, it would fall to 20 FPS quite frequently. These benchmarks were held on two different servers/maps, but both servers provided a good ping and player count was similar (18~). The same Visual Detail was used for both. I'm pleasantly surprised by the netcode changes and optimizations put into place to allow such a stable frame rate, but alas, a steady 60 FPS probably won't be feasible without a recent Intel CPU. Perhaps further optimizations past release will yield an average 60 FPS for AMD CPU owners, but the underwhelming single-threaded performance of the newly-released Vishera CPUs provides a bleak future for AMD users. Intel CPUs will continue to have an FPS advantage over Deneb, Thuban, Bulldozer, Piledriver, and most likely even Steamroller. Speaking of i5, my 3570k and new components have just arrived, and I expect my mind to be blown completely. :)