Destiny 2: PC graphics benchmark

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Such a good time for AMD, their new top end card is starting to beat a card 14 months older than it. A card that's 3rd in Nvidia's line-up and considered by AdoredTV to be a mid range part.
After 14 months AMD can beat Nvidia mid range part, you go AMD!

That'd be like the 1080 beating the Fury (non-X) when it was released, unimaginable!!!

 

[heartburnron]

Vega actually is holding its own on the results now the price needs to drop a little more

They're not priced too badly at the moment - £469 with Prey and Wolfenstien 2 for the Vega 64.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/powe...press-graphics-card-black-pack-gx-18z-pc.html

 

[heartburnron]

Such a good time for AMD, their new top end card is starting to beat a card 14 months older than it. A card that's 3rd in Nvidia's line-up and considered by AdoredTV to be a mid range part.
After 14 months AMD can beat Nvidia mid range part, you go AMD!

That'd be like the 1080 beating the Fury (non-X) when it was released, unimaginable!!!

It is a good time for Vega owners though. The fact that their rivals had this level of performance 14 months earlier is completely irrelevant to us and has zero impact on our experience. I've no idea who AdoredTV are but calling a 1080 a mid range part is a bit of skewed view surely; 1050Ti / RX470 - entry/budget level, 1060 / RX580 - lower mid range, 1070 / Vega 56 - higher mid range, 1080/Vega 64 - high end, 1080Ti / Titan - extreme. Those rankings make more sense to me and how I imagine most people surely consider the currently GPU line up?

 

[Martini1991]

It is a good time for Vega owners though. The fact that their rivals had this level of performance 14 months earlier is completely irrelevant to us and has zero impact on our experience. I've no idea who AdoredTV are but calling a 1080 a mid range part is a bit of skewed view surely; 1050Ti / RX470 - entry/budget level, 1060 / RX580 - lower mid range, 1070 / Vega 56 - higher mid range, 1080/Vega 64 - high end, 1080Ti / Titan - extreme. Those rankings make more sense to me and how I imagine most people surely consider the currently GPU line up?

A game doesn't become less demanding because your GPU is newer. Because of how long it's taken for Vega 64 to come out, the level of performance it offers isn't at the cutting edge really. It's entirely plausible that it'll stop being able to max out games within a year of its existence as performance at that point will be 2 years old.

I own a Vega 64, but I'm not going to pretend it's not a disaster.

 

[Lokken86]

Such a good time for AMD, their new top end card is starting to beat a card 14 months older than it. A card that's 3rd in Nvidia's line-up and considered by AdoredTV to be a mid range part.
After 14 months AMD can beat Nvidia mid range part, you go AMD!

That'd be like the 1080 beating the Fury (non-X) when it was released, unimaginable!!!

All that matters is the price/performance. Vega better value for money here.

 

[Aneskimo]

They're not priced too badly at the moment - £469 with Prey and Wolfenstien 2 for the Vega 64.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/powe...press-graphics-card-black-pack-gx-18z-pc.html

Did notice that after I posted, suppose you can sell off the games to make a bit back. I just want a competitive GPU market Ryzen has been a breath of fresh air in the CpU market and hopefully AMD bring it back on the GPUs

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

All that matters is the price/performance. Vega better value for money here.

In this game, overall, I'm not sure.

Also, for Vega 64 money you can get AIB 1080s with factory overclocks, which might bring them closer.

Also, that's very much your opinion, not some kind of fact. Some people may value performance more than bang-for-buck.

And to be fair the best price/performance usually sits more around the Nvidia X60/X70 and AMD X70/X80 ranges than the higher end stuff.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Some more tests:

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/destiny-2-test-gpu-cpu
https://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/3096-destiny-2-gpu-benchmark-launch-performance-uplift

In this game, overall, I'm not sure.

Also, for Vega 64 money you can get AIB 1080s with factory overclocks, which might bring them closer.

Also, that's very much your opinion, not some kind of fact. Some people may value performance more than bang-for-buck.

And to be fair the best price/performance usually sits more around the Nvidia X60/X70 and AMD X70/X80 ranges than the higher end stuff.

GN tested a EVGA GTX1080 FTW:

https://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/3096-destiny-2-gpu-benchmark-launch-performance-uplift

At 1440p/Highest, we plotted a similar performance stack, but note that this will switch-up once we get to the High results. The 1080 Ti manages 111FPS AVG, posting a 33% lead over the GTX 1080 FTW, with Vega 64 leading the GTX 1080 by 15%. This is a little different from the previous results.

Vega 56 is also functionally tied with the performance of the GTX 1080 FTW at 1440p/Highest, plotting an 83FPS AVG, and keeping lows consistent. This places Vega 56 in an advantaged position versus the 1080 and 1070 and, if you can find it for MSRP, makes it the better competitor at its price-point for these particular settings – but it gets more complex than that, as you’ll see in a moment.

So again we see at qHD and 4K AMD having an advantage.

The only realistic way for the GTX1070 and GTX1080 to catch up or beat the Vega cards is to drop settings at the higher resolutions.

Reducing settings to High, but staying at 1440p, we see the GTX 1070 catch back up to the RX Vega 56, leading marginally, with the GTX 1080 leading the Vega 64 card by 14%. The 1060 6GB and RX 580 8GB cards are within a few FPS of one another, with the GTX 1060 6GB card leading by 2.7%.

Our final few tests are at 4K, with highest plotting the 1080 Ti about 1-2FPS ahead of the beta, at 56.8FPS AVG, leading the 1080 by 36% and the V64 by 12%. Vega 64 outmatches the GTX 1080, in this instance.

We will need to wait and see if Nvidia pushes out a driver update,but currently it seems if you want to play on the highest settings at qHD and 4K,the AMD cards(even the RX580) seem to have an advantage over the Nvidia ones,with things switching the other way if you drop the settings or play at 1080p.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Tbh it looks like AMD may be able to squeeze some more performance. They look to be the ones that have a cpu bottle neck. At 1080p Nvidia have better performance even with the highest settings. At 1440p Vega starts to take a lead over the gtx1080 and then at 4k its all Vega. I wonder if dropping to high settings 1440p brings the Cpu back into play which hampers Vega. Looks that way to me but i guess we will see. With this being a Nvidia sponsored game you would think that they have got most if not all the performance out that they can.

The performance looks pretty decent on both brands at 1440p and below. 4k don't look to bad either. Played the original on ps4 at 30fps so it's all good

 

[Lokken86]

In this game, overall, I'm not sure.

Also, for Vega 64 money you can get AIB 1080s with factory overclocks, which might bring them closer.

Also, that's very much your opinion, not some kind of fact. Some people may value performance more than bang-for-buck.

And to be fair the best price/performance usually sits more around the Nvidia X60/X70 and AMD X70/X80 ranges than the higher end stuff.

It still has better performance and a lower price than the 1080 and the AIB cards aren't doing much better tbh. Plus what's stopping you overclocking the Vega I believe they are actually ok at overclocking. Maybe not as good as the 1080 but it's enough to keep distance between it and the 1080 (unlike the FuryX vs 980TI where the nvidia card can overclock past almost any advantage the AMD card had) .We'll just have to see if a driver can restore balance.

 

[LtMatt]

Don't forget GN turned down some settings in order to balance things up a bit in Destiny 2. At maximum settings our lead over the 1080 is pretty substantial.

You can expect to see this more often in games going forward, look at what happened in the past, it will happen again.

 

[Bazzards]

Running great for me, between 80 and 100 fps at 1440p. 125% res scaling all highest apart from blur, which is turned off. How do you run the benchmark?

 

[Radox-0]

I wonder what setting is killing the Nvidia cards when Maxed out vs running just High settings.

Running great for me, between 80 and 100 fps at 1440p. 125% res scaling all highest apart from blur, which is turned off. How do you run the benchmark?

There is no in game benchmark, rather the reviewers are running the same repeatable segment of the actual game to form the benchmark, usually the starting part it seems.

 

[Panos]

I'm surprised how well Vega 56/64 are doing at 1440p and 4k res, specially with this being an Nvidia title.

It seems all games perform better atm with the AMD latest drivers. There are plenty of benchmark videos especially at 4K DX11, pitting 1080Ti against Vega64 with HBCC on. Their different is at best 2 fps on the 78fps+ ranges.

 

[Gregster]

Don't forget GN turned down some settings in order to balance things up a bit in Destiny 2. At maximum settings our lead over the 1080 is pretty substantial.

You can expect to see this more often in games going forward, look at what happened in the past, it will happen again.

Hmmmm, on full settings over at Guru, things look different to what you are saying.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/destiny_2_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,4.html

 

[LtMatt]

Hmmmm, on full settings over at Guru, things look different to what you are saying.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/destiny_2_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,4.html

Vega performance is held back at 1080P as we are CPU limited. I notice you didn't include 1440P or higher.

Considering this is a NVIdia sponsored title, this showing at 1080P is not too bad.

 

[Radox-0]

Hmmmm, on full settings over at Guru, things look different to what you are saying.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/destiny_2_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,4.html

To be fair though, there 1440p and 4k results do however tally with other reviewers with the 56 / 64 doing very well at highest settings. 64 is only a few frames behind the Ti / Titan so not too bad IMO.

 

[Gregster]

Vega performance is held back at 1080P as we are CPU limited. I notice you didn't include 1440P or higher.

Considering this is a NVIdia sponsored title, this showing at 1080P is not too bad.

I only looked at 1080P and went no further. I See from Radox though (thanks Bud) that things do look good for AMD at 1440P and 4K though, so good stuff. Why are AMD CPU limited I wonder?

 

[LtMatt]

I only looked at 1080P and went no further. I See from Radox though (thanks Bud) that things do look good for AMD at 1440P and 4K though, so good stuff. Why are AMD CPU limited I wonder?

The Titan is 22% faster at 1080P than the 1080, but 35% faster at 4k, so it appears there is some CPU limitation at 1080P, likely due to the low resolution.

 

[Gregster]

The Titan is 22% faster at 1080P than the 1080, but 35% faster at 4k, so it appears there is some CPU limitation at 1080P, likely due to the low resolution.

I imagine on the NVidia side that 484 GB/S Vs 320 GB/S makes a big difference at the higher resolution.