We tested the next few games using FRAPS and playing through a portion of the game manually. For these games, we played through five 60-second gaming sessions per config and captured average and low frame rates for each. The average frames per second number is the mean of the average frame rates from all five sessions. We also chose to report the median of the low frame rates from all five sessions, in order to rule out outliers. We found that these methods gave us reasonably consistent results.
F.E.A.R.'s graphics quality options were all set to maximum for our testing. Computer performance was set to medium.
We're testing BF2 at an insanely high resolution because it runs really well on just about any of these cards at lower resolutions. Also, BF2 has a built-in frame rate cap of 100 FPS. We didn't want to turn off the cap, but we did want to see some differences in performance between the cards.
Like the two above, we played this game manually and recorded frame rates with FRAPS. In this case, we're playing an online game, so frame rates were subject to some influence from an uncontrollable outside factor. Regardless, I think the numbers below reflect performance pretty well.
|Telecom industry seeks to stay the FCC's net neutrality rules||16|
|Rise of Incarnates promises better fighting than Mayweather-Pacquiao||0|
|Hole in Realtek software imperils countless home routers||1|
|The TR Podcast 175: the Zen of chipmaking and ARM's Cortex-A72 revealed||4|
|Elon Musk lays out vision for a battery-powered future||123|
|Inside ARM's Cortex-A72 microarchitecture||40|
|Asus' 144Hz MG279Q monitor may top out at 90Hz with FreeSync||61|
|Deal of the week: A Bay Trail netbook for $161, free case fans, and more||18|
|DirectX 12 Multiadapter shares work between discrete, integrated GPUs||100|