• 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.

(gamegpu) Battlefield 1 Benchmarks

so many varibles in bf.

single player vs mp worlds apart.

game mode and player size.

some maps with different weather conditions on 64 man maps can be 20 fps different to others.

also min fps which many dont measure but probably the most important.

This. Also FOV. My OCed 980ti does about 100 average at 2560x1440 with horizontal FOV of 90 and all ultra in multiplayer. Great performance if you ask me. Very happy
 
also min fps which many dont measure but probably the most important.
Minimum FPS *can* be important, but isn't always. It depends completely on when that low was reached, how long it lasted and how frequently it happens.

If it's symptomatic of a game that regularly dips down to those levels for a period of time, it's very important. If it's just an extremely brief blip in an otherwise well performing title, it wont really mean much.

Frametimes and 99% percentile charts and whatnot tend to give a better picture of how much any dips are causing problems.
 
Minimum FPS *can* be important, but isn't always. It depends completely on when that low was reached, how long it lasted and how frequently it happens.

If it's symptomatic of a game that regularly dips down to those levels for a period of time, it's very important. If it's just an extremely brief blip in an otherwise well performing title, it wont really mean much.

Frametimes and 99% percentile charts and whatnot tend to give a better picture of how much any dips are causing problems.

While i agree with the above, Mins are definitely important if you have variable sync screens, especially with Freesync, if you have a 40-144hz range screen, keeping it well above 40 is important as the dips will bring you out of the range and you will get hitches etc.
 
How much system ram do you have ?
9GB


Have you checked your DPC Latency using latencymon? DX12 really sensitive.
No, I'm not sure how I would go about checking that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but DX12 has been touted as improving minimum frame times on weaker CPUs by using 'lower level' hardware functions, thus bypassing more of the driver translation?
 
On high I get no frame drops at all and super smooth over 60 fps all the time. However when I go ultra I get frame drops below 60 quite a lot. I know the card can handle it (480 4gb) so is it my CPU (4460) or my 8GB of RAM?
 
On high I get no frame drops at all and super smooth over 60 fps all the time. However when I go ultra I get frame drops below 60 quite a lot. I know the card can handle it (480 4gb) so is it my CPU (4460) or my 8GB of RAM?

Have you changed to dx12 where you will get the Cpu benefits and extra fps.
 
Never saw that coming.:p

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/software/battlefield_1_pc_performance_review/8


FX DX11 just slower than 1070@4K:eek:, 980Ti performance dropping off???

Well it does have 4096 cores ;). I'd expect nothing less for the card to be honest. Looking good for AMD with regards to DX12.

Hopefully give nvidia a good shove in the right direction with regards to A-sync.

But of course I'd really like to see the clocks used in this bench just to compare. Could be a 1600mhz FE 1070.
 
Last edited:
The 1060 when using DX11 is faster than the 480 using DX11 or DX12. It has the highest fps (overall) of any of these 4 tests. What else is there to say? the 1060 wins in this respect.


Also, my mistake for saying that the 1060 won in DX12.

And I do agree that these results are somewhat odd, but I can only go by what they say.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom