(gamegpu) Battlefield 1 Benchmarks

Doom112 · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:00

Seanspeed said:
Yup, that's really good.

I might turn a couple settings down and see if I can get a good 60fps at 1440p with my GTX970. Seems quite do-able.

If you conveniently ignore the DX11 charts, sure.

Sure that wasn't intentional on your part, though....

it is so funny that he posted only DX12 benchmark ,where their is no support of SLI, and CF. Most useless API.

Seanspeed · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:02

Doom112 said:
it is so funny that he posted only DX12 benchmark ,where their is no support of SLI, and CF. Most useless API.

It is obviously not useless at all for AMD users. I'm sure there's FAR more AMD users than there are multi-GPU users.

bru · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:16

Does DX12 actually look visually any different than DX11 in this title?

If it does then AMD DX12 vs NVidia DX12 is fair enough, but if there isn't then surely it should be the fastest for each that is compared?

Doom112 · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:22

bru said:
Does DX12 actually look visually any different than DX11 in this title?

If it does then AMD DX12 vs NVidia DX12 is fair enough, but if there isn't then surely it should be the fastest for each that is compared?

Simple logic does not apply to some posters here.

Nexus18 · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:42

*strokes 290*

SiDeards73 · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:46

Impressive DX12 results for AMD

Dave2150 · 23 Oct 2016 at 17:51

SiDeards73 said:
Impressive DX12 results for AMD

Ye, though 99% of games are still DX11.

By the time DX12 games are in the majority, all current GPU's will be scrap heap junk, even the 1080 etc, will be completely worthless in terms of value and performance.

AMD still need to work on their DX11 performance, since it will be the most important API for many years to come.

tommybhoy · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:01

Nexus18 said:
*strokes 290*

Lol when did matt grow a beard?

SiDeards73 · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:02

I couldn't really give a.monkeys about their dx11 performance, especially if the game has dx12 available, why would I? I only play older games mostly where anyhow, and I'm not afraid of dialling down settings to keep frame rates decent? Why would I care as long as it's playable and looks ok to me?

Too many people here quick to bad mouth AMD and resort to tired arguments like Dx12 is rubbish and not supported for years blah blah.

Almost like they need to justify to themselves that paying over the odds for Nvidia was worth it lol

So very sad

humbug · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:03

Doom112 said:
You are showing the results of worst API. In Dx11, GTX 980 Ti is getting 130fps ,where fury X is getting 119 fps on DX12 at 1080p and at least post DX11 benchmark.

Which is faster than the 1070.

So from these charts, ignoring the 1080,

The GTX 980TI is the fastest card but only if in DX11.
The GTX 1070 also does better in DX11 than it does in DX12 despite being Nvidia's new DX12 wonder architecture.....
The Fury-X does best in DX12, is just as fast as the GTX 1070 bar 2 FPS.

So while they still have the outright fastsest cards while waiting for AMD to get their competing cards out; Nvidia still struggle with new API's.

The Fury-Nano is 15% behind the 1070 in its best DX11 showing.
Even AMD's budget end RX 480 is not a million miles behind it.
RX 480: 91 FPS - DX12.
Fury-Nano: 105 FPS - DX12.
Fury-X: 119 FPS - DX12.
GTX 1070: 121 FPS - DX11 <-best showing.

Doom112 · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:26

humbug said:
Which is faster than the 1070.

So from these charts, ignoring the 1080,

The GTX 980TI is the fastest card but only if in DX11.
The GTX 1070 also does better in DX11 than it does in DX12 despite being Nvidia's new DX12 wonder architecture.....
The Fury-X does best in DX12, is just as fast as the GTX 1070 bar 2 FPS.

So while they still have the outright fastsest cards while waiting for AMD to get their competing cards out; Nvidia still struggle with new API's.

The Fury-Nano is 15% behind the 1070 in its best DX11 showing.
Even AMD's budget end RX 480 is not a million miles behind it.
RX 480: 91 FPS - DX12.
Fury-Nano: 105 FPS - DX12.
Fury-X: 119 FPS - DX12.
GTX 1070: 121 FPS - DX11 <-best showing.

nvidia only struggle in Gaming evolve title other then that it is faster then AMD on DX12.

humbug · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:27

Doom112 said:
nvidia only struggle in Gaming evolve title other then that it is faster then AMD on DX12.

oh..... so AMD are gimping Nvidia?
Is BF1 a GE title?

Doom112 · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:38

humbug said:
oh..... so AMD are gimping Nvidia?
Is BF1 a GE title?

yup.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/battlefield-1#

GoogalyMoogaly · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:50

humbug said:
Which is faster than the 1070.

So from these charts, ignoring the 1080,

The GTX 980TI is the fastest card but only if in DX11.
The GTX 1070 also does better in DX11 than it does in DX12 despite being Nvidia's new DX12 wonder architecture.....
The Fury-X does best in DX12, is just as fast as the GTX 1070 bar 2 FPS.

So while they still have the outright fastsest cards while waiting for AMD to get their competing cards out; Nvidia still struggle with new API's.

The Fury-Nano is 15% behind the 1070 in its best DX11 showing.
Even AMD's budget end RX 480 is not a million miles behind it.
RX 480: 91 FPS - DX12.
Fury-Nano: 105 FPS - DX12.
Fury-X: 119 FPS - DX12.
GTX 1070: 121 FPS - DX11 <-best showing.

Why are we/you ignoring the 1080?

humbug · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:53

No other reason than sake of argument ^^^^ the 1080 really has no equal.

Doom112 said:
yup.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/battlefield-1#

Yup to what? that its a GE title or that AMD are gimping Nvidia?

If AMD are gimping Nvidia then how is it Nvidia are releasing performance enhancing 'Game Ready' Drivers?

Final8y · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:55

humbug said:
oh..... so AMD are gimping Nvidia?
Is BF1 a GE title?

No its not, AMD is just helping promote it.

Just like Battlefield: Hardline was not a GW title but still NV was promoting it..
http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/pc-games/battlefield-hardline
http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/battlefield-hardline

Sid Meier's Civilization VI with it running so much better on NV cards ATM, AMD is just helping promote it.
http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/civ-6

shankly1985 · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:56

AMD is just a sponsor.. Dice work with both AMD and Nvidia to insure best possible GPU support. Always have and always will.

Just look how well Battlefield games run "Ignoring the crashing atm" Performance is excellent ALL around for everyone!
Wish the same could be said for Games DontWorks titles!!

tommybhoy · 23 Oct 2016 at 18:57

Pretty pointless imo not comparing direct competition on an api war googly.

bru · 23 Oct 2016 at 19:23

Doom112 said:
nvidia only struggle in Gaming evolve title other then that it is faster then AMD on DX12.

humbug said:
oh..... so AMD are gimping Nvidia?
Is BF1 a GE title?

Not at all, Dice's frostbite engine works better on AMD than it does NVidia, that doesn't mean that NVidia is being deliberately gimped, it is just the way it is some engines work better on NVidia than they do on AMD. different engines are like that, certainly not an indication that either side is deliberately being gimped.

shankly1985 · 23 Oct 2016 at 19:24

bru said:
Not at all, Dice's frostbite engine works better on AMD than it does NVidia, that doesn't mean that NVidia is being deliberately gimped, it is just the way it is some engines work better on NVidia than they do on AMD. different engines are like that, certainly not an indication that either side is deliberately being gimped.

Unreal Engine being one of them.