Heck, even Intel's GMA X3500 (assumed, due to low scores but DX10 capability) was faster than an i7!!
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Jeremy Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > I should already mention, MS did their own WARP benchmarks, and even an i7 > didn't fare overly well @ Crysis on min res/settings. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd285359.aspx > > I think I ahve posted numbers from Swiftshader/Cod4 on my i7, too. > > My point is, anybody with a decent CPU capable of rendering at a playable > framerate, would already have a GPU capable of rendering it faster. Not to > mention, many games take a serious hit on the CPU, too. > > On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:24 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Probably an upgraded version of the reference rasterizer, which in my >> times of pentium 200 did work, but with shaded megapixels, it gets a >> bit tricky :S >> >> On Jul 5, 10:18 pm, "THEfog ." <[email protected]> wrote: >> > @NSP >> > Lol its 'Warp' not 'wrap' haha. >> > >> > If anyone is wondering what Warp stands for it is "Windows Advanced >> > Rasterization Platform". >> > >> > THEfog >> > >> > On 06/07/2010 2:21 AM, "DanielPK" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > both dude! as everyone else said, if u've got a SUPER CPU then you'll >> > be able to run the game with style...lol, so ya, that FPS is because >> > of the game req and the warp method! >> > >> > On Jul 5, 10:26 pm, NSP <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > fps 1 - 3 is due to this wrap method or bec... >> > >> > >> >> -- >> 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS >> > > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
