• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Fable Legends: AMD and Nvidia go head-to-head in latest DirectX 12 benchmark

Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,638
Location
The KOP
As DirectX 12 and Windows 10 roll out across the PC ecosystem, the number of titles that support Microsoft’s new API is steadily growing. Last month, we previewed Ashes of the Singularity and its DirectX 12 performance; today we’re examining Microsoft’s Fable Legends. This upcoming title is expected to debut on both Windows PCs and the Xbox One and is built with Unreal Engine 4.

Like Ashes, Fable Legends is still very much a work-in-progress. Unlike Ashes of the Singularity, which can currently be bought and played, Microsoft chose to distribute a standalone benchmark for its first DirectX 12 title. The test has little in the way of configurable options and performs a series of flybys through complex environments. Each flyby highlights a different aspect of the game, including its day/night cycle, foliage and building rendering, and one impressively ugly troll. If Ashes of the Singularity gave us a peek at how DX12 would handle several dozen units and intense particle effects, Fable Legends looks more like a conventional first-person RPG or FPS.
There are other facets to Fable Legends that make this a particularly interesting match-up, even if it’s still very early in the DX12 development cycle. Unlike Ashes of the Singularity, which is distributed through Oxide, this is a test distributed directly by Microsoft. It uses the Unreal 4 engine — and Nvidia and Epic, Unreal’s developer, have a long history of close collaboration. Last year, Nvidia announced GameWorks support for UE4, and the UE3 engine was an early supporter of PhysX on both Ageia PPUs and later, Nvidia GeForce cards.

Test setup
We tested the GTX 980 Ti and Radeon Fury X in Windows 10 using the latest version of the operating system. Our testbed was an Asus X99-Deluxe motherboard with 16GB of DDR4-2667 memory. We tested an AMD-provided beta driver for the Fury X and with Nvidia’s latest WHQL-approved driver, 355.98. NVidia hasn’t released a beta Windows 10 driver since last April, and the company didn’t contact us to offer a specific driver for the Fable Legends debut.
The benchmark itself was provided by Microsoft and can run in a limited number of modes. Microsoft provided three presets — a 720p “Low” setting, a 1080p “Ultra” and a 4K “Ultra” benchmark. There are no user-configurable options besides enabling or disabling V-Sync (we tested with V-Sync disabled) and the ability to specify low settings or ultra settings. There is no DX11 version of the benchmark. We ran all three variants on both the Fury X and GTX 980 Ti.

ZP0tyxd1azIqdVs936dhAqs7TMSdddTr479b5WPE28A

989mbUhpV_ZW-4Uu9mt-MkKXgAhgU_yildxy1N6SAXQ

HrmrDi4VS3syoIKkj0oln5h70MimxMqJtCL-kFKuTm8

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/2...o-head-to-head-in-latest-directx-12-benchmark
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
11 Jun 2015
Posts
128
Pretty much neck and neck with the 980Ti and Fury X. What's interesting IMO is the 390 performance. Nice stuff but I would like to see some more user benchmarks when this game/benchmark is widely available.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
91,435
"We tested an AMD-provided beta driver for the Fury X and with Nvidia’s latest WHQL-approved driver, 355.98. NVidia hasn’t released a beta Windows 10 driver since last April, and the company didn’t contact us to offer a specific driver for the Fable Legends debut"

Interesting wording - at face value it makes it look like nVidia were supposed to look in their crystal ball and be all like "oh extreme tech are going to run a benchmark tomorrow quick someone get them the latest driver!" :p

About the results I expected given the architecture differences but will be interesting to see how performance stacks up with an nVidia optimised driver as well as an AMD one.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,638
Location
The KOP
You could have quite easily included your 2nd post in the 1st?

The +1 stands just fine :)

Like it matters? I already clicked post and besides I using phone. Much faster and easier to just reply to thread.

Get a grip mate you getting defensive over nothing. No wounder this forum goes off topic so fast it's these pointless back and forth over what? Because I posted my input after OP?

Wow.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
AMD always rush a beta driver out so that they can get the jump in early benchmarks, it's a shame they are not so quick to fix bugs which can ruin the actual gaming experience on their cards.

I bet they are not even doing full tessellation if the game supports it either, now that their cheats are widely accepted they can just lower tessellation factors to the lowest point with every game.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
13 Oct 2009
Posts
778
Nice to see the Fury X catching up, but it's still not enough as it doesn't OC worth a damn compared to the GTX 980ti. What I really care about is latency for VR as that is going to matter so much more than a few fps in the future.
 
Back
Top Bottom