Create new account
Forgot password?

BLOG

Barla Von's picture

By Barla Von

July 16, 2009

  • Barla Von's blog
  • Login or register to post comments

Resident Evil 5 PC Benchmark Tool

OK, so i just downloaded this and gave it a spin. It's another stunning Capcom PC conversion that measures up to Street Fighter IV, Devil May Cry 4 and Lost Planet before it.

The MT Framework engine is excellent, in fact, Capcom should whore the engine out to other developers as a FPS would be stunning using such an engine.

At 1680x1050 (1050p) with everything set to high, 2X Anti-Aliasing and running DX10 mode the game is running like a dream, i'm averaging 60FPS. It runs silky smooth with no judder, no tearing, plus it has superior textures and lighting than the console versions! There is more enemies on-screen too!

The benchmark cycles through a various number of levels from the game, but not just the ones from the console demos, there's later levels included also. It's an awesome tool for determining how well your PC can run the game because all the test sections include dozens of enemies. It's an exceptional port.

No doubt, this will be the version of the game with an improved mercenaries mode, three times as many enemies on screen and support for Nvidia's GeForce 3D Vision technology.

I've got my 360 owning buddy over to show him and he's like:

 

So, please, post your scores you got using the benchmark (link below). I cannot wait for the release.

My Specifications:

  • Intel Q6600 @ 2.38 GHz
  • 3GB RAM
  • 1680x1050
  • Nvidia 8800GT
  • Average FPS - 60.2
  • Rating - given by benchmark: B

 

http://www.fileshack.com/file.x/14772/Resident+Evil+5+Benchmark+Version

 

 

kingheff1's picture
On July 19th kingheff1 said:

I'm running on a Phenom 9950 running at 3 ghz, ati 4870 1gb and four gigs of ram.
Same settings as you Barla, got an average fps of 75.1 and an A ranking, which was nice! :)
But did the third area test run noticeably slower for you?
The four seperate areas rates as follows: 89.6, 80, 59.6 and 74.2.
When I tried running it in 1900x1200 with AA x 8 I averaged 40-50 fps, but the third area was running very slowly, only 12-25 fps, even in areas with no enemies onscreen.
I'm wondering if that area hasn't been fully optimised...
But a great link, thanks for that. :)

Barla Von's picture
On July 19th Barla Von said:

Yeah, the third area is the most intense thoughout the benchmark, along with the first area. Those areas do test your system.

Yet saying that, it's strange how you've went from 89.6 in the first area (which is has the same intensity as area 3, judging by my own tests) to 59.6 in area 3, which has the same intensity as area 1. You shouldn't have had such a drop in fps judging by the numbers you put up.

Area 2 and area 4 are the least intensive throughout the benchmark, i was getting an average of 60fps in those areas, yet in area 2/4 you went from 80 fps then to drop 74.2 fps. It makes no sense?

Have you got screen shots of your results at the end of the benchmark?

Edit: I think it's an ATI issue with regards to your drop in fps. Check out this link, there's a few people talk about it:

http://neogaf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=368352&page=7

Also, this guy has a similar set-up to yourself and gets an exceptional performance.

kingheff1's picture
On July 21st kingheff1 said:

I'm currently in the middle of a complete vista re-install so I can't undertake any more benchmarks.
Though I'm assuming the post above was done with a, probably, 4870X2 maybe even a pair in crossfire. My brother just upgraded to a Q6700 and a pair of 4870's and he's not hitting figures like that, though the superior cpu of the above test maybe the reason for the gap in performance, since my brother saw little gain in lower resolutions.

bluecat's picture
On July 17th bluecat said:

Looks awesome. I'd love to see it in motion on a high powered PC.
I just want to point out that I wouldn't really care about all those impressive specs if the game itself didn't have such excellent designs. It's a surprisingly beautiful game, very well crafted not just technologically but artistically.

Capcom has some of the very best artists in the industry. I'm glad they seem to be putting model viewers in all their newer titles. It's a real treat to see the characters up close. There are so many incredible, subtle details in place that tend to just fly by in the heat of the action, but they went the extra mile and put them in there anyways.

I was completely blown away by how distinct every human being in the game looked. They were remarkably ungeneric and had the presence of real individuals. They didn't have the dead fish eyes that tend to haunt most realistic looking next-gen titles.

I could go on and on. Anyway, I'm glad other people seem to be enjoying the amazing visual feast this game has to offer. I hope while you're taking in the amazing technical prowess of the game that you also take time to enjoy the very well thought out art decisions as well.

Cheers!

Barla Von's picture
On July 17th Barla Von said:

I'm looking forward to the game. I'd ilke to see Capcom licence the MT Framework engine out to other developers as it's a great engine. I can just imagine a cyber-punk adventure game like Deus Ex using such an engine...it would be bliss.

Top_Dollar's picture
On July 17th Top_Dollar said:

Wow, the 360/PS3 versions look piss-poor in comparison. Consoles have nothing over PC's, they will always be a generation or two behind in terms of tech.

I mean, some 360/PS3 games can't even do native 720p, nevermind native 1050, 1080 or 1600 progressive scan.

Whisky a Go Go's picture
On July 16th Whisky a Go Go said:

Sounds awesome. Need to get me a new PC.

Barla Von's picture
On July 16th Barla Von said:

This person is running the game at: 119 FPS. . That's insane.