Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. 2 DX11 Benchmark



Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. 2 Benchmark

Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. 2 Benchmark


Because there’re no enough days in a year, NVIDIA decided today (the day of Radeon HD 6870 of course) to promote a new in-game Direct3D 11 tessellation benchmark: Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. 2 DX11 Benchmark.

This game benchmark requires an account at Ubisoft and if you’re like me with no account, the procedure to create a dummy one is simple and fast.

This benchmark like almost all tessellation benchmarks is not recommanded by AMD because it’s a bit unrealistic:

A quick comparison of the performance data in H.A.W.X. 2, with tessellation on, and that of other games/benchmarks will demonstrate how unrepresentative H.A.W.X. 2 performance is of real world performance.

Humm… already heard that, for TessMark I think 😀

I don’t know why for a tessellation benchmark, but H.A.W.X. 2 DX11 benchmark doesn’t enable the tessellation by default. What’s more you can’ enabble it with the GUI. The only way I found is to edit the following ini file:

C:\Users\{YourName}\Saved Games\Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. 2 Benchmark\Profiles\{YourName}_settings_.ini

DX10_ssao = 0.000000
multisample_quality = 0
textureQuality = 1.000000
DX10_sunshafts = 1.000000
<b>DX10_tesselation = 1.000000</b>
DX10_shadows = 1.000000
particlesDensity = 1.000000
globallod = true
postProcessing = 1.000000

DX10 tessellation, ssao, shadow… Why not DX11 ???

And don’t forget to also disable the VSYNC (enabled by default this time!).

Here is my score with the MSI N460GTX Cyclone 768D5 (+ CPU: Quad core X9650 @ 3.2GHz):
– Max FPS: 180
– Avg FPS: 108

Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. 2 Benchmark score, GTX 460



UPDATE (2010.10.23): Radeon HD 5870 score (with Cat 10.10a):
– Max FPS: 198
– Avg FPS: 136

HAWX2 - Radeon HD 5870 score

Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. 2 Benchmark

[via]



13 thoughts on “Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. 2 DX11 Benchmark”

  1. Psolord

    Well, AMD indeed DOES have a point when they are complaining about silly amount of polygons on screen. What good is a polygon that is as small as a pixel or less? That’s just ridiculous. We want games to advance in a good way. Not to crawl to a halt.

  2. mako

    [quote]
    What good is a polygon that is as small as a pixel or less?
    [/quote]
    FSAA Antialiasing is done averaging SUBpixels…
    Ati is wrong. They just know their tessellator sux and they’re trying to hide it.

  3. HAWX

    pff! what it takes to be a test! They are ridiculous. pff! 717MB and only one test: []

  4. WacKEDmaN

    wondering how this is a DX11 benchmark when it clearly only supports DX10

  5. JEsk

    well I guess if AMD going to reduce the tessellation via driver and then approve the benchmark for testing it’ll be nothing but cheating.

    It’s funny they are saying we only accept this test as relevant if our cards only draw 300 polygon while the other competitor draw 3000 polygon

  6. JEsk

    by the way after downloading the benchmark ,I guess when AMD said it’s unfinished they were to some extent right

    there is instances when the explosion are occurring on the mountain instead of the in the air when the bombers are. or sometimes a bomber get destroyed while there is no explosion at all

    and in 1 or two instant sunlight reflection just turned into masses of triangles .

    By the way I’m interested to know how bad this bench run On ATI , I wonder if somebody know some result for ATI

  7. Hyde

    The AMD card is running in a system with a newer i7 core @ 3,2ghz vs. the nvidia setup with the older core 2 duo @ 3,0ghz.
    Not really a valid comparison…
    But still, the mid-end 460 768mb is kicking serious but vs. the slightly higher scoring high end ati card…

  8. Pingback: [Tested] ASUS ENGTX580 1536MB at Geeks3D Labs - 3D Tech News, Pixel Hacking, Data Visualization and 3D Programming - Geeks3D.com

  9. BlackX

    You must start HAWX2_DX11.exe then you can enable it via GUI and you have realy tesselation.

Comments are closed.