It's interesting that you even benched these @ 2560x1600 resolution which is what I'm gaming at too, while some other reviews don't or omit them for the lesser 2560x1440 sibling!
Though getting figures for 1440p benches should still be applicable, just maybe expect that you will get slightly less fps for the extra 160 pixels in height increase.
All testing was done using a fresh install of Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit and benchmarks were completed on the desktop with no other software programs running.
How is this possible if some of these games require Steam client to be running in the background...?
Tomb Raider Benchmark
We set the image quality to ultimate for benchmarking, but we disabled TressFX Hair under the advanced tab to be fair to NVIDIA graphics cards that don’t support the feature.
You do realize this would then just be the Ultra preset, right? Because Ultra and Ultimate is pretty much the same, except for the added TressFx for Ultimate.
I also got confused how you got ~113 fps on average at 1600p when I only got 36 on average. Until I checked out the preset advance tab to see what is turned on and what isn't by default and realize I was actually running the game at *Maximum* image quality
. I thought Ultimate was
maximum, nope just only a few settings here and there tuned down a bit. So I switched the preset from Custom to Ultimate and turned TressFX off and it reverted to Ultra, I compared and it was exactly the same as Ultimate, but without TressFX setting on. Ran a benchmark on that preset and yeah, my average fps does compare to yours - I got ~110fps, probably minus 3 fps due to other software programs and stuff running in the background, compared to your 113 figure.
In case anyone wants proof, here's a screenshot of my results on Maximum
: http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.c ... 6CE33A02E/
and another on Ultra
(same settings as the ones used in the review): http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.c ... 2578C8116/
So I'm wondering, why don't you bench these games with all eyecandy turned on? Is it that there's not really any distinguishable image improvements over the settings you chose or....?
Sorry couldn't stop myself from nitpicking and creating an account solely to comment about it....hahaha