• 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.

Forza Horizon 4 Bench Thread

Tommy_Here said:
2160p
Titan Xp 2000/3152
4790k @ 4.7ghz
416.16 Drivers.
qODgq8t.png

Was expecting a bigger gain between me and some of the other cards re-ran a few times different drivers couldn't break 64fps.

1440p & 1080p pointless as GPU usage was 85% at 62% respectively...think my next upgrade is a new CPU and Mobo finally retire my 4790k :D
Click to expand...
I am not surprised with the results as they are in line with what gamers nexus said in his review of the Titan Xp vs Titan X Pascal. I used to think there was at least 10% difference between the two, but in majority of titles it is closer to 5% it seems.

I would not be worried though, your score is so close to a 2080Ti which costs at least twice what you paid for your Titan Xp ;)

I agree with CPU and Mobo being the next upgrades. I am waiting for both Zen 2 on 7nm and Intel 10nm and I will likely pick one of those up. Though playing at 4K, I am not sure if it will make much difference to fps. But it will have been 6+ years on Haswell for me by the time those come out, so nice to get something fresh :)
 
TNA said:
I am not surprised with the results as they are in line with what gamers nexus said in his review of the Titan Xp vs Titan X Pascal. I used to think there was at least 10% difference between the two, but in majority of titles it is closer to 5% it seems.

I would not be worried though, your score is so close to a 2080Ti which costs at least twice what you paid for your Titan Xp ;)

I agree with CPU and Mobo being the next upgrades. I am waiting for both Zen 2 on 7nm and Intel 10nm and I will likely pick one of those up. Though playing at 4K, I am not sure if it will make much difference to fps. But it will have been 6+ years on Haswell for me by the time those come out, so nice to get something fresh :)
Click to expand...

Compared to my 1080 Ti it's approximately 10-15% faster though the Ti wasn't the best clocker. I think it varies from benchmark to benchmark between the X Pascal and xp like in gears of war mine is roughly 12% faster iirc will have a look when I get home :)

I think we've both done well on the prices however! Especially when the 2080 Ti isn't miles faster! The Gp102 is most definitely a 4k 60 capable gpu
 
Tommy_Here said:
Compared to my 1080 Ti it's approximately 10-15% faster though the Ti wasn't the best clocker. I think it varies from benchmark to benchmark between the X Pascal and xp like in gears of war mine is roughly 12% faster iirc will have a look when I get home :)

I think we've both done well on the prices however! Especially when the 2080 Ti isn't miles faster! The Gp102 is most definitely a 4k 60 capable gpu
Click to expand...
:)
 
1080P
980TI @ Stock - Afterburner wasn't working for me but GPUZ sensor log has core boosting to 1189-1202MHz and memory rock solid at 1752
4670K @ 4.2 (Got a 4790K on its was as an upgrade that was too cheap to pass up)
411.70 Drivers

44618639214_5293e2d9fb_o.png
 
1080p
GeForce GTX 970 @ 1496/3920
FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz
416.34 Driver

VYYeEaL.jpg

3440x1440
GeForce GTX 970 @ 1496/3920
FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz
416.34 Driver

VJWQPZ9.jpg

Ouch :p
 
1920x1080
EVGA 1060 3GB @ Stock
16GB Crucial Tracer @ 1600mhz
i5 2500k @ 4.4Ghz
416.81 Driver


Interesting performance issues after running the benchmark on Ultra, I lose 10 frames per second average if I switch to High and then run it again, if I restart the game, it averages over 70fps. Invalid result for the thread but here it is anyway.

Happy enough to be able to run it at high with vsync at 60fps.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom