Guru3D.com
  • HOME
  • NEWS
    • Channels
    • Archive
  • DOWNLOADS
    • New Downloads
    • Categories
    • Archive
  • GAME REVIEWS
  • ARTICLES
    • Rig of the Month
    • Join ROTM
    • PC Buyers Guide
    • Guru3D VGA Charts
    • Editorials
    • Dated content
  • HARDWARE REVIEWS
    • Videocards
    • Processors
    • Audio
    • Motherboards
    • Memory and Flash
    • SSD Storage
    • Chassis
    • Media Players
    • Power Supply
    • Laptop and Mobile
    • Smartphone
    • Networking
    • Keyboard Mouse
    • Cooling
    • Search articles
    • Knowledgebase
    • More Categories
  • FORUMS
  • NEWSLETTER
  • CONTACT

New Reviews
Fractal Design Pop Air RGB Black TG review
Palit GeForce GTX 1630 4GB Dual review
FSP Dagger Pro (850W PSU) review
Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
Hyte Y60 chassis review

New Downloads
Intel ARC graphics Driver Download Version: 30.0.101.1743
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.6.1 WHQL driver download
GeForce 516.59 WHQL driver download
Media Player Classic - Home Cinema v1.9.22 Download
AMD Chipset Drivers Download v4.06.10.651
CrystalDiskInfo 8.17 Download
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.6.1 Windows 7 driver download
ReShade download v5.2.2
HWiNFO Download v7.26
7-Zip v22.00 Download


New Forum Topics
FSR Thread AMD Radeon Software - UWP PlayStation 3 emulator increases its CPU performance by 30% with AVX-512 NVIDIA GeForce 516.59 WHQL driver download & Discussion AMD is planning to release Ryzen 7000 CPUs in September AMD has released the FSR 2.0 Plugin for Unreal Engine 4 and 5. Download: AMD Chipset Drivers Download v2.13.27.501 Is 2090 gpu core a good O.C for a 3080ti? AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.6.1 - Driver download and discussion AMD AMF and GPU Encoding Issues and Discussion (notably for VR)




Guru3D.com » Review » Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare PC graphics benchmark review » Page 9

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare PC graphics benchmark review - Graphics memory (VRAM) usage and Conclusion

by Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 11/04/2016 11:21 AM [ 5] 53 comment(s)

Tweet

Graphics memory (VRAM) usage

How much graphics memory does the game utilize versus your monitor resolution with different graphics cards and respective VRAM sizes ? Well, lets have a look at the chart below. The listed MBs used in the above chart is the maximum measured utilized graphics memory during the test run. During game-play the game is swapping and loading stuff. As such in the most scenarios you'll notice your VRAM is filled flat out full, then memory gets emptied chunk by chunk bit and then filled again. VRAM behaves a little weird as we have seen some occasions where high resolutions used a bit more memory then a lower one. The next run it was normal and another reversed again. Overall, the game will load up as much as it can for caching purposes in a very dynamic fashion.
  


 
The title basically is a fill most you can type of game. E.g. it buffers as much as need an as it would like to. Up-to Full HD (1920x1080) an up-to 3GB graphics card of decent caliber will do the job just fine really. 4GB is your best bet and target for 2560x1440, especially at the best image quality settings VRAM eats away a large portion of whatever is available. If you want to play Ultra quality with Ultra HD as preferred monitor resolution, that 4GB is the minimum (unless you are comfortable to twiddle and fiddle around a little with AA settings etc).
  

 

Concluding

You need to wonder how many times a game can be re-spun, with the COD series apparently thirteen times already and it remains to be a hit slash cash-cow. It is difficult to stay original though hence the team went into space, adding the dimension of gravity. Space FPS games however are not a very popular thing, so I look forward reading your experiences and feel on this iteration of Call of Duty. As always, the graphics are okay, but are just that. COD is not even come close to what Battlefield 1 for examples offers in terms of graphics eye-candy. But also I have to admit, it doesn't look bad though. The added benefit of a light-weight game however is that you will not require hugely expensive graphics card to play the game, even at the very best image quality settings. But oh boy, how nice would it have been to see the development team to make a D3D12 version with kicks-ass graphics.

My biggest physical complaint about the game (and this goes for many games these days) is that it requires 70GB of HDD/SSD space. The download sizes and installs numbers are getting hidiously big in volume size. From a graphics point of view the good news is that you will not require an enthusiast class PC to run at the very best quality. Up-to 2560x1440 a GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470 will hold ground really well. The RX 400 series actually managed to impress as it seems far better optimized compared to say a Furu, R390 or R380. Nvidia scores properly well throughout the book on everything that starts at Maxwell.

Call of Duty Infinite Warfare will NOT very likele make it into our regular benchmark suite for videocards. In the past we run into this as well, but there are things odd and off. As such we recommend you to look at the performance benchmarks as indicative performance. At one point the result set would be 50 FPS, and on the second similar path and execution 42 FPS and another 56 FPS. This means that the results shown today are indicative, not a precise measurement. Another problem was that some levels average out at say 40 FPS, yet there are a handful of scenes where the framerate will crumble down to say 25 FPS or where running a luxurious 60 FPS all of the sudden. That is the reality of this game engine.

The vast majority of the game plays with excellent framerates though, even with a mainstream card. Overall the game feels smooth in game-play, nothing negative to mention there. Both AMD and Nvidia are doing fine in resolutions up-to 2560x1440 really, going towards Ultra HD or DRS/VSR well then 4GB models will slowly start to run out of breathing air (VRAM). Obviously you can simply lower image quality settings a bit and work your way through there as the game will play just fine on pretty much any card. 

We do hope you like this little test as it will be an indicator of overall performance. All modern graphics cards will run the game at Full HD without any issue. There is just no need to drop down in images quality modes too massively and heck, that's where we as PC gamers needs to be. For the single game players out there, the story line of the single player campaign is actually fairly nice. The space scenario is a little icky and surrealistic though. The true COD afficionado's however will enjoy the gameplay.

- H.

  • Sign up to receive a notice when we publish a new article
  • Or go back to Guru3D's front page



9 pages « < 6 7 8 9



Related Articles
Call of Duty: WW2: PC graphics analysis benchmark review
It's time to check out that PC release of Call of Duty: WW2 for Windows relative towards graphics card performance with the latest AMD/NVIDIA graphics card drivers. Multiple graphics cards are bein...

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare PC graphics benchmark review
It's that time of the year, Call of Duty in it's Infinite Warfare glory has been released. We will look at the game in our geeky gamer way. We'll test the game on the PC platform relative towards ...

Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review
It is that time of the year again, we take out a dozen or so graphics cards and benchmark Call of Duty: Black Ops III. Join us in this article where many graphics cards are being tested with the new t...

Call of Duty Advanced Warfare VGA graphics performance benchmark review
It is that time of the year again, we take out a dozen or so graphics cards and benchmark Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. Join us in this article where many graphics cards are being tested with the ne...

© 2022