Alright. Low quality, 1024x768, it turns 120-140 fps. 
Course, it looks like it’s been hit with an ugly stick, but it’s quick.
ETA: 1024x768 Medium: 90-100 fps
AGAIN ETA: I think it’s using low quality objects, as I change the other settings and object quality stays on ‘low’…man, this benchmarking is…difficult
When your rate scales down linearly with increased resolution then it’s almost always the video card. Getting 30-35 with with dx10 medium or dx9 high should be doable for you.
Damn…I want to play those games, but I can’t beat Asteroids.
So in other words…Crysis has defeated yet another high-end computer?
I wouldn’t say that - the 260 is solid but definitely not high end, and he can play the game at 1680x1050 medium settings with a smooth frame rate and it’ll still look better than any other game ever made.
I know, I was kidding to a degree (and am envious of the machine), but…I just thought he’d get better results given the specs. Must be (duh) the video card.
My Nvidia 9600GT can’t do that!
You’d be able to play the Rise of Mankind mod for Civ IV past gunpowder age…grumble…memory leak…grumble…grumble.
Defeated? Ow!
IT looks bloody Gorgeous at High and 34 FPS…But not as pretty as DiRT 2…THAT’s the first game that really made it look like crap on my 360 in comparison…and it doesn’t look half bad on the 360!
GTA 4 is supposed to have some future-proofing built into it. I would see how high it will let you crank the settings if you happen to have this game.
“Future proofing” is just a euphemism for “shitty port.”
Nah, I think there’s legitimate “future proofing” in, for example, Crysis, where it was so technically ambitious that it wouldn’t be able to be used to the max for several years, so that when you came back at the game with future hardware it’d be a better experience. This, by the way, was the biggest criticism of the game because people are idiots. The game looks better than any game ever made on medium settings, yet if people couldn’t max out the game they cried about it. If they had released Crysis where medium was the maximum setting (relabelled ultra) and removed every other fancy graphical thing above it from the game, it would’ve been better received (because all the idiots could’ve happily maxed the game) even though the game offered less and was worse looking.
GTA 4, on the other hand, is just garbage. Bad programming, requiring you to have way better hardware than you should need just to get basic performance out of it, like you’re running it through an emulator or something.
FWIW, I was giddy as a schoolgirl when I upgraded my video card in the old computer to handle, uh, DVD backups. It allowed me to rip DVD’s for the Apple TV at 80 fps or so, with iPod rips piping along at 180 fps. iPhone rips were slower, at about 120 fps.
The i7 920 is about 20% faster than the GPU ripping solution, with the DVD drive being a bottleneck. An iPod rip, from hard disk, it poking along at a leisurely 230 fps. (!)