Catzilla – 进阶版 - 测试和游戏玩家的建议。 功能:自定义测试、建议、归档及历史结果比较并于硬盘储存结果。FREE版(免费版)及BASIC(基本版)不提供上述选项。测试同时检测所有的计算机组件(不只是显卡)。测试后使用者取得说明游戏中计算机性能的计算机证书 及如何增加性能的建议。该程序显示如何更换及何处可购买可以不多的费用升级计算机。
用户评测: 褒贬不一 (44 篇评测)
发行日期: 2014年2月28日
该产品的热门用户自定义标签:

想要将这款游戏添加到您的愿望单或标记为不感兴趣,请先登录

购买 Catzilla - Advanced

 

最近更新 查看所有(1)

9月25日

Catzilla 1.3 is available

What's new?

- correct detection of the latest graphics cards and processors (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 745, NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870 and 880)
- added support of AMD Carrizo
- added caching of GPU I2C devices to speed-up the scan process
- added support of more NVIDIA GM107 and GM108 models
- fixed support of AMD Oland/Mars/Sun/Jet GPUs
- fixed support of DDR4 SDRAM
- fixed reporting of DDR3 memory timings for some modules
- more games for "Check Game" option

2 条评论 了解更多

关于这款软件

Catzilla – 进阶版 - 测试和游戏玩家的建议。

功能:自定义测试、建议、归档及历史结果比较并于硬盘储存结果。FREE版(免费版)及BASIC(基本版)不提供上述选项。测试同时检测所有的计算机组件(不只是显卡)。测试后使用者取得说明游戏中计算机性能的计算机证书 及如何增加性能的建议。该程序显示如何更换及何处可购买可以不多的费用升级计算机。

主要功能


  • 建议系统 - 软件和硬件的建议。

    该软件找出潜在问题并提出解决方案,如:安装最新的驱动程序、设置合适的快速缓冲储存区容量、增加可用磁盘空间量、提高色彩深度、分辨率、更换较好的显卡或处理器等。

  • 检查游戏

    测试计算机组件时,游戏的最低要求类似。这样,我们将获游戏是否顺利的解答及所有的计算机相关细节。游戏也有证书,如同计算机组件和计算机一样,如此将更容易确定设备需要多强大的设备来启动。

系统需求

    Minimum:
    • OS: Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista
    • Processor: Intel Core2Duo or AMD Athlon II
    • Memory: 4 GB RAM
    • Graphics: GeForce 8x00 series or Radeon HD2000 series
    • DirectX: Version 10
    • Hard Drive: 500 MB available space
    • Sound Card: not required
    Recommended:
    • OS: Windows 8, Windows 7
    • Processor: Intel i5 CPU, AMD FX 6xxx
    • Memory: 4 GB RAM
    • Graphics: GeForce 8xxx series or Radeon HD 5xxx series
    • DirectX: Version 11
    • Hard Drive: 500 MB available space
    • Sound Card: not required
有价值的用户评测
141 人中有 128 人(91%)觉得这篇评测有价值
21.6 小时(记录在案的)
I've built rigs for the 25 years since I was 12. They're usually very high end rigs, where phenomenal performance and reliability are vital.

My tool-set changes and expands with the landscape. On Windows, some of my favorite utilities remain the following, offered for informative purposes:

+ SpeedFan
+ CPU-Z
+ GPU-Z
+ memtest
+ RealTemp
+ OCCT

These are robust and free. They focus on hardware monitoring, testing, benchmarking, and burn-in. I prefer pegging-out my CPU, RAM, GPU, and PSU for at least 24h before any overclocking or tweaking. Once I'm happy with a configuration, I then burn-in for as many days as patience allows. If something's going to die, I want to know while I can easily RMA it.

Modern GPU manufacturers also distribute good utilities with their hardware.

----
Utilities like Catzilla and 3DMARK (an established alternative I'll discuss alongside Catzilla) provide benchmarks geared toward replicating possible realistic gaming usage rather than stressing and killing your system.

Catzilla performs a similar set of complex graphical scene tests as others in this field and provides you an overall score with a breakdown of test elements at the end and an option to submit to an online database for comparison to the wider testing population.

It also seems to use the same score calculations. The numbers come in similar to tests on other suites and at the same "better than 90%" placement that other suites give this 2.5yr old system.

Core functionality, therefore, seems on-par with competitors.

It is everything wrapped around that core which erodes my interest.

----
Launching Catzilla hung my system and reduced the GUI to low-memory mode for the two minute load time. Competing products launch instantly.

Once launched, the first thing I noticed was that they used resolution terminology that put me off, because it comes across as inexperienced. They provide only the vertical number, followed by a "p".

It may seem pedantic, but when referencing display resolutions in the world of PCs, you provide both horizontal and vertical measurement (1920x1200). We do this, because there are many aspect ratios (5:4, 4:3, 16:9, 16:10, 21:9). Providing a single number omits vital info that can impact calculations like estimated performance or configuration.

You can't assume 1080 vertical means anything, because horizontal could be 1920 at 16:9, but 2560 at 21:9. You can't assume 2560 horizontal means anything, because at 16:9 vertical would be 1440, but 1600 at 16:10.

This terminology is acceptable for TVs, because they're standardized at 16:9. While prevalence of 16:9 TVs made it common with computers (manufacturers would rather produce one ratio than reconfigure plants for multiple), you can't count in this being the case.

We also don't add p to the resolution. It stands for progressive scan (as opposed to interlaced), which every monitor inherently is, so there's no point going out of our way to redundantly state this.

This is accepted in TVs, because some TVs only do interlaced at certain resolutions and some content is only progressive or interlaced and some hardware (like last gen consoles) only deliver an interlaced signal, in some cases.

I can accept someone coming from the console world, with little PC experience, or simply caught up in the habit of using TV-specific terminology may discuss resolutions in this way, but it leaves me with a negative impression from a professional software developer putting out PC software to test PC displays for PC rigs.

3DMARK and other suites give full resolution detail when referenced and uses accurate terminology.


----
The second negative impression came with trying to customize a test for my system. The default tests run at 576 (oops, "576p"!), 720, 1080, and 1440. All 16:9 ratios. I have a 16:10 display and I want a benchmark that is representative of what I'm going to have when I'm gaming at 16:10 at a native resolution.

Unfortunately, you can't. Even "custom" configuration does not allow you to choose anything but those four resolutions. All you can customize are options like multi-threading. A developer confirms in their forums that there is no way to customize resolution and this will never change.

Presumably, this is to standardize certain parameters for comparison of your benchmark against others in the database. Fine. I still want the option to perform my own benchmark under my own conditions and parameters so that I can compare my system against itself after performance tuning. These four resolutions make for a constrained testing environment.

3DMARK and other suites allow full configuration of these options and even uploading them to their database for comparisons.

----
I was disappointed that the touted Hardware recommendation feature/tab never worked. It had zero results and kept saying that I needed to run a full test. This was supposed to be a feature which links you to advised hardware upgrades.


----
Another problem you will encounter is navigating their site. A dark and "edgy" interface which looks more at home as the official Call of Duty site. It isn't enjoyable to use. In fact, it can be confusing.

One button pulls up a set of information, but it seems broken, until you realize the data has been displayed a couple screens downward, without any evident notification.

Also, one expects the "compare to other users" button to match your results against the database, until much frustration ultimately reveals it only compares you against one user that you must provide a name for. Comparison against the whole population requires going back to the application and selecting "show all" under the Top 10 users list, which launches your browser and takes you to the database.


----
Worse, you have to register an account and link it to your application. An overly complex process involving multiple long codes, contradictory sets of instructions, and numerous failed attempts. I ultimately had to rely on a user in the forums who found another guy's steps listed somewhere. Even these did not help; but they guided me in the right direction. This should be a simple matter of "application gives me a code, I go to website and enter code on my profile". Some parts of the process even take you to dead URLs with error messages.

My final complaint is that when you exit the program, Steam thinks it is still running. I am unable to identify this application running in the process table, but Steam will not close, because of it. You can not launch Catzilla again, either, until you reboot your computer.


----
Ultimately, Catzilla is serviceable.

It has received some press in the last year, but it's usually around how quirky the superfluous test video is. Dismissing that; focusing on what is actually provided, it does what other packages do, but in a less polished way with fewer customization options.

I still prefer 3DMARK, which I mention in this review because of its popularity, my familiarity, and its availability on Steam. While $10 USD more, it's more robust, less glitchy, has a pleasing interface, allows more customization and control, and has an established history and reputation. It is also frequently updated and offers a wider variety of specialized tests for everything from a tablet, notebook, and laptop to an extreme gaming rig.

Even better, wait until 3DMARK is on sale. I've seen it 90% off ($2.50) in the last week of 2013. While waiting for a sale, use the free version (or free version of another suite).

But keep an eye on Catzilla. I love competition and hope they continue to refine this. I hope it evolves into a robust utility giving competitors a run for their money. I just don't see the current iteration being part of my tool-set at the current price.
发布于:9月27日
这篇评测是否有价值?
17 人中有 11 人(65%)觉得这篇评测有价值
3.7 小时(记录在案的)
It's an alright benchmark, i wouldn't put it up in the ranks of 3dmark but it's good all the same, one issue i had with this if you're running a crossfire setup the benchmark won't untilise both cards only the one, so if you're benching something like a laptop this might be an alright bench but there are defonatly better options out there.
发布于:6月27日
这篇评测是否有价值?
5 人中有 3 人(60%)觉得这篇评测有价值
10.9 小时(记录在案的)
Catzilla will test your hardware at different screen ressolutions using the latest DX feature sets and provide you a over all score and recommendation to improve your current hardware if need be.

Very nice tool to have, Updated frequently, user friendly.
发布于:9月2日
这篇评测是否有价值?
5 人中有 2 人(40%)觉得这篇评测有价值
1.8 小时(记录在案的)
wow. it can predict before i'll buy a game. ;)
发布于:9月30日
这篇评测是否有价值?
3 人中有 1 人(33%)觉得这篇评测有价值
2.3 小时(记录在案的)
this is a fun benchmark! i love it
发布于:6月9日
这篇评测是否有价值?
755 人中有 708 人(94%)觉得这篇评测有价值
6.5 小时(记录在案的)
MAJOR UPDATE TO THIS REVIEW! CHANGING FROM NOT RECCOMENDED TO RECCOMENDED.
PLEASE READ THE NEW UPDATE FOR 23/03/2014.

UPDATE 23/03/2014:
Catzilla has apparently listened to the negative feedback and fixed pretty well everything I had an issue with.
They've :
- improved their description to show exactly what you're getting
- upgraded what you actually get for your $15
- changed their product base from a subscription service to one-time purchase
- updated the software to fix bugs

I can now say that I'm happy that I spent $15 on a piece of good benchmarking software.

Now you get pretty much everything you could ask for from this product for $15. A consistent overall benchmark that seems to allow a good comparison between machines. Some nice features like being able to save all test scores to disk for later use, or being able to upload all your test scores to an online profile where you can compare against other users on the leaderboards.

I will leave the old version of the review below, but please note that the old review no longer reflects anything of the new updated version.






EVERYTHING UNDER THIS LINE IS OLD AND NO LONGER APPLIES TO THIS PRODUCT.
I AM ONLY KEEPING IT HERE AS A BIT OF HISTORY TO MAKE OLDER COMMENTS MAKE SENSE.

I wish I had realized that this is basically the "free" version of Catzilla (mentioned nowhere in the description) that you can download from their website at no charge. In order to actually get any real features, you have to sign up for a damn subscription (again mentioned nowhere in the description).

UPDATE: I didn't notice before but as another reviewer pointed out, it does allow you to run all the tests (vs just up to 720p like the free version), but that's the only difference between this and the free version that I've been able to see so far.
发布于:3月1日
这篇评测是否有价值?