Interesting: Black OPS Windows 7 v XP performance.

[MatTheCat]

So ?, it drops to min 45 fps meaning it's way playable. Dunno what the benchmark is like with BO but if any thing like Mafia II it's way over what you actually need playing the game.

And lets face all it takes is a few extra lighting effects and such to make a frame rate drop.

To me, 45FPS for a game boasting as backwards gfx technology as COD BLOPS is totally unacceptable. For me to put up with less than a solid 60FPS, the game has to be something special (BFBC2 multiplayer for example).

Also, with BLOPS, my graphics card is only 36% utilised at most, whereas my dual core CPU's are normally both maxed out. This is shockingly inefficient use of resources.

In short, the author doesn't reveal anything that couldn't be fabricated by someone with an agenda. It may be my paranoia, but someone who writes a scathing article without anything but the barest of facts generally hasn't thought it through, or is pushing their belief shrouded in the guise of fact.

I wouldn't necessarily say that.

Another game, PRO EVO Soccer 2011, runs flawlessly on my old single core XP machine, but like shit on my Windows 7 gaming machine.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Don't tell me you still believe it's not, it's basically the same as Vista with a small tweaks here and there. The article author even stated the amount of RAM the system was using at idle, at the end of the article, 75% more RAM usage than on XP, leading to less free RAM available, leading to more page file usage, leading to more hard disk usage, leading to more and bigger waits between multiple disk reads, leading to slower system. How is that not bloated compared to XP?

Well......ok. Um have fun with XP.

 

[boise49ers]

The thread of the day no doubt about it
You fellas know the new games coming out in
the future will not even run on XP don't you ?
BF 3 being one of the first.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

firstly win7 is deff off topic and besides the point since his sys is underspec simples,

and secondly cod bops does use quad cores, a friend at work just bought mobo x4 amd and ram just to play that game(his 4870 is still on the job) and he bought that because it wouldnt let him play it not that he couldnt ,steam wouldnt install it,not sure what intel dual core he had prob for deff,think it was a E6400 or something like it

 

[TheMailMan78]

DOS owns XP. XP is sooooo bloated compared to DOS.

 

[MatTheCat]

The thread of the day no doubt about it
You fellas know the new games coming out in
the future will not even run on XP don't you ?
BF 3 being one of the first.

Yes.

But the point is that there are some lazy developers out there who are putting out titles that dont run properly on windows 7, even though it says on the box windows 7 is recommended.

I can max out every CoD title, but BLOPS runs like crap, both online and offline! why? There is nothing special about this game. There is no amazing gfx tech on display. i can even run Crysis Warhead on enthusiast with better performance than i get out of COD BLOPS.

I actually paid money for this game (dont know why, I never bought a CoD title in my life....they are all bland crap imo) and I am left with an unwanted Steam installation and bad taste in my mouth.

When I read the article a light went on in my head. I have seen this before. As I described, PES 2011 will run flawlessly on any old XP machine but stutters around on any modern Windows 7 gaming rig. Just damn lazy developers.

I have not tried BLOPS on XP as no CoD game is worth going to much effort over.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

funny guy four cores, thats all ya need not xp or win 7 or vista but the power of 4

your ona about many different games all made differently at different times too, i feel for ya but it was and is allways on the cards that the next game will end your pc's life, if mine stops doing what i expect its gettin drop kicked

 

[2DividedbyZero]

funny guy four cores, thats all ya need not xp or win 7 or vista but the power of 4

your ona about many different games all made differently at different times too, i feel for ya but it was and is allways on the cards that the next game will end your pc's life, if mine stops doing what i expect its gettin drop kicked

harsh





















but true

 

[boise49ers]

funny guy four cores, thats all ya need not xp or win 7 or vista but the power of 4

your ona about many different games all made differently at different times too, i feel for ya but it was and is allways on the cards that the next game will end your pc's life, if mine stops doing what i expect its gettin drop kicked

Yeah I just went Quad a year ago with DDR2 and next week I get all my parts for a Hex core BE and DDR3. The never ending revolving door of pc GAMING. I'm sticking with Vista 64 bit though.
I just got rid of a Dell Quad with Window 7 64 bit and really prefer Vista over 7. Maybe the only guy in the world that does I run it toned way down so it runs smooth as butter. Plus updating it to the newest version helps a lot.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

that wasnt that harsh surely

ya have togo win7 proff/ulty to use 2x diff gfx cards in same pc unfortunately(146 quid ulty)

 

[MatTheCat]

funny guy four cores, thats all ya need not xp or win 7 or vista but the power of 4

If a game needs four cores, then I expect it to look and play like it needs four cores. Not look and play like a bog standard 2006 dual core game, but still require 4 cores to run.

CoD BLOPS runs better on the fecking consoles than it does on my PC!

I suspect XP would sort the porblem out but like I say, going to any hassle for this game wouldnt be worth it.

 

[AsRock]

Don't tell me you still believe it's not, it's basically the same as Vista with a small tweaks here and there. The article author even stated the amount of RAM the system was using at idle, at the end of the article, 75% more RAM usage than on XP, leading to less free RAM available, leading to more page file usage, leading to more hard disk usage, leading to more and bigger waits between multiple disk reads, leading to slower system. How is that not bloated compared to XP?

Yes Vista and win 7 take a little extra ram but not much.. You can have 8GB of ram and all of it's used but that means shit.

Thats how Vista and Win7 work it just caches it but if a different app requests the ram it gets released to the app that requires it as if that was not the case i would have to use a pagefile which i don't..

And in any case 4GB is recommended for todays games. If ya too tight assed to get 4GB over 2GB you deserve to not be able to play games even more so when ya can get like 4GB of newegg on sales around $40-$50.

 

[ctrain]

i've mentioned in other posts, max_fps and maxpackets have a direct relation to one another - pick these wisely, google for a guide. Also snaps should ideally be set to 30.

these are the only 3 things changed in my config, else settings are maxed at 1920x1200

snaps 30 doesn't do anything. the server framerate is 20, there's only 20 snapshots.

Don't tell me you still believe it's not, it's basically the same as Vista with a small tweaks here and there. The article author even stated the amount of RAM the system was using at idle, at the end of the article, 75% more RAM usage than on XP, leading to less free RAM available, leading to more page file usage, leading to more hard disk usage, leading to more and bigger waits between multiple disk reads, leading to slower system. How is that not bloated compared to XP?

you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[2DividedbyZero]

snaps 30 doesn't do anything. the server framerate is 20, there's only 20 snapshots.

try telling my hit-reg that, oh wait, no need, its already immense. I'll take my own advise ty.

 

[ctrain]

try telling my hit-reg that, oh wait, no need, its already immense. I'll take my own advise ty.

or you could just look at lagometer and see for yourself / not play guessing games but if it helps you feel good whatever.

 

[2DividedbyZero]

or you could just look at lagometer and see for yourself / not play guessing games but if it helps you feel good whatever.