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
EVGA GeForce RTX 3070 FTW3 Ultra review
Corsair 5000D PC Chassis Review
NZXT Kraken X63 RGB Review
ASUS Radeon RX 6900 XT STRIX OC LC Review
TerraMaster F5-221 NAS Review
MSI Radeon RX 6800 XT Gaming X TRIO Review
Sapphire Radeon RX 6800 NITRO+ review
Corsair HS70 Bluetooth Headset Review
MSI MEG X570 Unify review
Scythe Ninja 5 air cooler review

New Downloads
AIDA64 Download Version 6.32.5617 beta
3DMark Download v2.16.7117 + Time Spy
Prime95 download version 30.4 build 6
Crystal DiskMark 8.0.1 Download
Corsair Utility Engine Download (iCUE) Download v3.37.140
ReShade download v4.9.1
GeForce 461.09 WHQL driver download
Intel HD graphics Driver Download Version: DCH 27.20.100.9126
HWiNFO Download v6.41–4345 Beta
MSI Afterburner 4.6.3 Beta 4 Download


New Forum Topics
AMD AGESA COMBO PI V2 1.2.0.0 Is Coming For MSI 500 Series and 400 Series Motherboards NVIDIA Profile Inspector 2.3.0.12 Creative Labs releases special edition Sound Blaster Z PCIe Equivalent to Control Panel Frame Limiter in Older Drivers? RDNA2 RX6000 Series Owners Thread, Tests, Mods, BIOS & Tweaks ! CD Projekt apologizes for the release of Cyberpunk 2077 and shows 2021 roadmap Nvidia GeForce Driver Version 461.09 Download & Discussion DisplayPort 2.0 Monitors delayed due to Corona crisis Did NVIDIA silently downgrade G-Sync Ultimate HDR specification? Nvidia shows signs ...




Guru3D.com » Review » Call of Duty Ghosts VGA graphics performance benchmark review 4

Call of Duty Ghosts VGA graphics performance benchmark review 4

Posted by: Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 11/07/2013 02:28 PM [ 36 comment(s) ]

We benchmark Call of Duty Ghosts. Join us in this preliminary article where close to 20 graphics cards are being tested with the new Call of Duty Ghosts.  As such we'll take a dozen of graphics cards today and have a look at DX11 performance with the newest graphics cards and technologies. The new and popular title is looking great from a graphics point of view.

Read article


Advertisement



« GeForce GTX 780 Ti SLI review · Call of Duty Ghosts VGA graphics performance benchmark review · AMD Radeon R9 270 review »

pages 1 2 3 4 > »

(.)(.)



Posts: 9094
Posted on: 11/06/2013 03:28 PM
Cheers Hilbert, awesome write up. :thumbup:

I still think nvidia and IW missed an opportunity to ship retail pc versions in a fur covered dvd case and then, when you open it, random crap falls out onto the ground representing PhysX.. well thats probably more gravity and an annoying mess to clean up... but its still be better than 'John Romero is going to make you his b***h' advertising campaign.

Slikar
Senior Member



Posts: 368
Posted on: 11/06/2013 03:34 PM
What is this? Titan and 290x on 1600x1200 not even 60fps :D nice job IW , nice job..

moab600
Senior Member



Posts: 6263
Posted on: 11/06/2013 03:34 PM
game is such unoptimized horrible performance, this game should be banned from PC until they fix it.

CrazY_Milojko
Senior Member



Posts: 2007
Posted on: 11/06/2013 03:44 PM
Nice review Hilbert, but I have one question: GeForce GTX 690 results are there, but where are Radeon HD 7990 results?

Edit:
My bad, I've missed that: "...The mighty Radeon HD 7990 caves in, Crossfire did not kick in...". ...because I was probably shocked by low fps results on high-end Radeon cards.

Edit #2:
I've loled so hard after closer look @ results because I was not looking below 7970.
1600x1200 GTX 660 = 41 / R9 290X = 51
1920x1200 GTX 660 = 37 / R9 290X = 51
2560x1440 GTX 660 = 30 / R9 290X = 45
R9 290X could easily obliterate my GTX 660 in any game today, it's obvius that NVidia's money is drilling holes everywhere they can, "good job" NVidia, but you can go to hell as far as I'm concerned, my next card probably will be from 79xx/R9-280X series... Hope that new Radeon drivers will improve performance in CoD:Ghosts for Radeon 78xx/79xx/R9 2xx cards, but after all who cares about CoD games on PC anymore.

cowie
Senior Member



Posts: 13268
Posted on: 11/06/2013 03:46 PM
game is such unoptimized horrible performance, this game should be banned from PC until they fix it.


hell i could still be on a 680 if a played this game,whats wrong with that?
A 250usd card plays it as well as a 1000usd card. Thats a game that is for the masses not like the other shooter game that came out just the other day

pages 1 2 3 4 > »

Post New Comment
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.

Guru3D.com » Articles » Call of Duty Ghosts VGA graphics performance benchmark review 4

Guru3D.com © 2021