Performance Tests
We found that the X3 rolling demo makes a good benchmark due to its excellent graphics. The benchmark is fairly long and covers many different aspects of the game like fighting and building complex structures. In addition to being able to adjust standard settings like resolution and AA/AF, there are high, medium and low options for both shader and texture quality. There is also a handy feature that sends a breakdown of the details of the different scenes in the demo to a file for reference. These details include average, minimum and maximum frame rates for each scene in the demo, as well as the settings enabled for the benchmark. We ran several tests with X3 to see the kind of results that we would get across a range of NVIDIA and ATI cards. Here is the list of cards as well as the system that we tested:
The interesting thing that we see here is how close together all the numbers are. It's also interesting to see that X3 seems to favor both ATI and NVIDIA hardware in the same manner, as NVIDIA does better in general by only a few frames. Overall, the results are somewhat eerie given that each card on one side of the ATI/NVIDIA line gets a very similar frame rate to its competition on the other side. This means that the X3 rolling demo will probably make a very well-rounded addition to our performance benchmarks for future reviews.
We also wanted to see how CPU intensive X3 was on our system, so we tested the game on our highest performing card (7800 GTX 512) with both our standard 2.6GHz processor (AMD Athlon FX-55) and a slower 1.8GHz processor (the FX-55 with a multiplier of 9 to simulate a slower processor). This helps us get a better idea of how much CPU speed affects performance in the game.
As illustrated, what is most noticeable here is that without AA enabled, the benchmark's frame rate on the 1.8GHz system is almost exactly the same between the two resolutions. Even when AA is enabled at 12x10, we are still CPU bound. This means that, in general, lower speed processors will have a large impact on framerate for higher end graphics cards. Even our high end CPU was limited with high end graphics cards plugged in, making this game a good CPU benchmark as well as a good GPU test. People with mid-range GPUs probably won't need anything more than an entry level current generation Athlon 64 for good performance - after all, we will never run into the CPU limit if the graphics card isn't fast enough to outpace the CPU when running X3.
We found that the X3 rolling demo makes a good benchmark due to its excellent graphics. The benchmark is fairly long and covers many different aspects of the game like fighting and building complex structures. In addition to being able to adjust standard settings like resolution and AA/AF, there are high, medium and low options for both shader and texture quality. There is also a handy feature that sends a breakdown of the details of the different scenes in the demo to a file for reference. These details include average, minimum and maximum frame rates for each scene in the demo, as well as the settings enabled for the benchmark. We ran several tests with X3 to see the kind of results that we would get across a range of NVIDIA and ATI cards. Here is the list of cards as well as the system that we tested:
| Testbed | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor |
| Memory: | 2x512MB OCZ 2-2-2-6 1T DDR400 RAM |
| Motherboard: | SI K8N Neo4 Platinum/SLI |
| Hard Drive: | Seagate 7200.7 120 GB |
| Power Supply: | OCZ 600 W PowerStream |
| Graphics Card: | NVIDIA 6600 GT NVIDIA 6800 GS NVIDIA 7800 GT NVIDIA 7800 GTX NVIDIA 7800 GTX (512) ATI X800 GTO ATI X1300 Pro ATI X1600 XT ATI X1800 XL ATI X1800 XT |
The interesting thing that we see here is how close together all the numbers are. It's also interesting to see that X3 seems to favor both ATI and NVIDIA hardware in the same manner, as NVIDIA does better in general by only a few frames. Overall, the results are somewhat eerie given that each card on one side of the ATI/NVIDIA line gets a very similar frame rate to its competition on the other side. This means that the X3 rolling demo will probably make a very well-rounded addition to our performance benchmarks for future reviews.
We also wanted to see how CPU intensive X3 was on our system, so we tested the game on our highest performing card (7800 GTX 512) with both our standard 2.6GHz processor (AMD Athlon FX-55) and a slower 1.8GHz processor (the FX-55 with a multiplier of 9 to simulate a slower processor). This helps us get a better idea of how much CPU speed affects performance in the game.
| Processor | AA/AF | Resolution | Performance |
| 2.6GHz | Enabled | 1600x1200 | 47.5 |
| 1280x1024 | 57.8 | ||
| Disabled | 1600x1200 | 59.0 | |
| 1280x1024 | 63.8 | ||
| 1.8GHz | Enabled | 1600x1200 | 44.9 |
| 1280x1024 | 49.5 | ||
| Disabled | 1600x1200 | 50.4 | |
| 1280x1024 | 50.8 |
As illustrated, what is most noticeable here is that without AA enabled, the benchmark's frame rate on the 1.8GHz system is almost exactly the same between the two resolutions. Even when AA is enabled at 12x10, we are still CPU bound. This means that, in general, lower speed processors will have a large impact on framerate for higher end graphics cards. Even our high end CPU was limited with high end graphics cards plugged in, making this game a good CPU benchmark as well as a good GPU test. People with mid-range GPUs probably won't need anything more than an entry level current generation Athlon 64 for good performance - after all, we will never run into the CPU limit if the graphics card isn't fast enough to outpace the CPU when running X3.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
Michael - Saturday, January 28, 2006 - link
Go to Egosoft's website and you'll see the countless reports of the current bugs in the game. The developers seem to be working on them, but I question using the engine for any testing right now when there's no way to know exactly what is broken behind the scenes. I suppose the "rolling demo" is OK because the same code is there for all the benchmarking, but it is not an accurate indication of what the different cards may do in the actual game as the game itself is unstable. X3 should never have been released in the condition it was in. Even the manual was very messed up.That said, I did appreciate the range of different CPUs and cards tested.
Michael
kgrach - Tuesday, February 7, 2006 - link
X3 gets worse by the day. The game installed a nasty anti-copy protection sceme called starforce. THIS IS THE USA VERSION WHICH IS NOT SUPPOSED TO DO THAT.it has major problems with SCSI and SATA systems.
Gets better, everybody who has problem with loading the games is told to email starforce the error dump from starforce.
I took a look at what starforce reports back to the software company in Russia.
Name address of registered owner
all hardware
all drivers
All errors that have acured
all software running on the machine currently
okay i understand that
All software installed on machine and who it is registered to.
all users on machine and status admin user
all network settings
firewall settings and security levels
All security software settings
not good very nervouse about giving that info out but the reall kicker is of the four
names it pulled out of the hundreds in my favorites and history to put in the error report no they are not the latest or first in my history.
Two antivirus sites
My bank
My mutual fund
X3 has now gone beyond bad programing right up to serious malware.
I Now looking on who to contact at the state attorney general.
Kgrach
SpareFlair - Friday, January 27, 2006 - link
For those that think the game looks a bit dry from the rolling demo, the gameplay is actually much different and can't really be explained. The universe is huge, made of hundreds of sectors and there is a thing called artifical life that runs the whole universe and keeps track of every ship in it and everything it does so it's a real working economy...while there's also a war going on between several species.There will be a playable demo released soon, which also won't be that indicative of full gameplay but basically it gives you a few ships and you have to defend against waves of enemies while building up your economic empire (to afford forces) in between waves. The real game is nothing at all like this, but it will let you experience combat and some elements of the economy and station/ship building.
Personally my favorite part about this game is that it's finally a space sim where you can scare the enemy pilots into ejecting. Then you can steal their ship and run over their space-suit...or capture then and sell them into slavery.
Regarding the Anandtech article, it looks like this will be a good benchmark for both CPU and videocard reviews. Hopefully some more SLI and dual core information will come up.
kgrach - Saturday, February 4, 2006 - link
Don't bother buying this game it has a horrible interface on top of many problems.Example in the middle of combat a help box pops up in the middle of the screen to give you a helpful tip to close said box that is now obstructing your view.
Right click your mouse button to disable ship control. Yes you heard me right, disable ship control in the middle of COMBAT. Then move the mouse pointer to close icon and left click.
oh did I mention that while you are doing this your ship stops all forward movement. So not only do you have no control of you vessel you are a sitting duck.
The helpful tip in combat was to tell me not to forget to turn on the rear turret.
good advice except it failed to mention how to accomplish that feat.
The game starts with a very complicated screen of which you have no idea what does what since the few tiny pictures in the manual of the icons don't show you much as they take a 1280 X 1280 resolution color screen shrink it to 3/4 inch smeary B&W square of BLACK SPACE and you have to try to figure out what means what by the brief description. You start with a simple mision of going to a warp gate and escorting some newbies around how you are supposed to do that and how do you even know where that stargate is is a mystery that they don't bother to explain to you.
There was supposed to be some simulations that teach you basic stuff like navigation ship controls,docking and trading. But none of that has made it into the game or the manual yet.
Also insult upon injury the controls don't match what the manual say's they do.
So even thought they don't tell you how things works that is made more complicated that they don't even match.
So you say simply go into the game control screen and remap the buttons which BTW is only accesable during live game play.
You can pause the game. but the instant you call up the menu for changing the controls it unpauses the game.
Anybody wants the game just pay for postage you can have my copy on the condition you give it a full review.
Ohh I forgot to mention the entriging plot. Get this your father while playing with an expiremental ship is blasted to an unknow part of space and while trying to find his way back to earth saves that section of space. while in this unknow section of space he finds you his long lost son. how you got there and the rest of the humans is a question mark since they don't explain that. there is a reference of leading the bad guys away from earth but I thought you didn't know the way home and of course you can't ask dad becuase hes in a coma and your best friend is dead. Oh since your father was rich would make the game way to easy they had all of your factories destroyed by some uknown enemy.
If you think the plot is bad that is nothing compared to the intro animation.
It makes me long for my C64 of course. The animations where better on the C64. also on the C64 the music didn't drown out the dialog. Which once the animation played and Iwas in the game proper I could now reset the sound setting so that the music wasn't set at 84 and the dialog set at 80. Now I could replay the awful animation and listen to even worse dialog.
STAY AWAY FROM THIS GAME AT ALL COSTS.
Has a good idea good graphic engine but I think the game was launched when the code was still pre alpha. The game is not even good enought for beta status yet.
kgrach
phusg - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
Any chance of testing this game with a dual core/CPU setup? I'd be very to see if this CPU bound game is multi-threaded.coldpower27 - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
Yes since it was an Athlon FX 55 that was used there should be no penalties for using the Athlon FX 60.VIAN - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
At least the demo sucked, and that's enough for me not to buy the game.boinkle - Thursday, January 26, 2006 - link
Heh. Looks a bit dry doesn't it... graphics are reasonable though.Main problem I have is, I'm severely CPU limited using an Athlon 64/2.35GHz. My x800GTO2 runs this at the same framerate at 10*7/noaa/noaf, and 12*10/*8/*16.
There must be some insane physics going on behind the scenes...
phusg - Saturday, January 28, 2006 - link
> insane physicsHmmm, maybe, but then I wouldn't have thought the physics in a vacuum could get all that complicated (as long as the number of on screen objects is low enough of course). I'd imagine the AI keeping track of all the economies/wars etc is what's hitting the CPU...
robg1701 - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link
Any chance of having scores added for the X1900XT. I realise there arent enough cards to go round but, releasing a benchmark roundup the day after the latest and greatest, you kinda expect it to be included. Especially when it mixes the hardware structure up compared to its peers the way that R580 does with its many pixel shaders.