Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.C CPU Cooler review
be quiet Pure Loop 2 FX 280mm LCS review
HP FX900 1 TB NVMe Review
Scythe FUMA2 Rev.B CPU Cooler review
SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
Corsair K70 RGB PRO Mini Wireless review
MSI MPG A1000G - 1000W PSU Review
Goodram IRDM PRO M.2 SSD 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
Samsung T7 Shield Portable 1TB USB SSD review
DeepCool LS720 (LCS) review
Wolfenstein II The New Colossus: PC graphics analysis benchmark review
Posted by: on: 11/05/2017 11:47 AM [
39 comment(s) ]
It's time to check out the PC release of Wolfenstein II The New Colossus for Windows relative towards graphics card performance with the latest AMD/NVIDIA graphics card drivers. Multiple graphics cards are being tested and benchmarked. We have a look at performance with the newest graphics cards and technologies.
Read article
Advertisement
pages « < 5 6 7 8
Agonist
Senior Member
Posts: 3807
Senior Member
Posts: 3807
Posted on: 11/07/2017 02:49 AM
Vram mate, and they are starting to run out of grunt, while Polaris is really starting to shine.
Some of AMDs own cards are trash in this game (Fiji). Furyx is behind RX470 at all resolutions.
Vram mate, and they are starting to run out of grunt, while Polaris is really starting to shine.
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 11339
Senior Member
Posts: 11339
Posted on: 11/07/2017 06:52 AM
Did you see the vram usage chart?
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-pc-graphics-analysis-benchmark-review,6.html
At 1080p vram is not an issue for 4gb cards. A 4gb 570 is way ahead of FuryX at that res. Also bear in mind that FuryX is HBM with a massive 1024 bit bus and can handle far higher mem bandwidth than regular gddr5 cards.Yes Polaris is starting to shine while Fiji imo is undergoing the 'Kepler effect'. AMD driver team more focused on their newer cards is my take on it.
Vram mate, and they are starting to run out of grunt, while Polaris is really starting to shine.
Did you see the vram usage chart?
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-pc-graphics-analysis-benchmark-review,6.html
At 1080p vram is not an issue for 4gb cards. A 4gb 570 is way ahead of FuryX at that res. Also bear in mind that FuryX is HBM with a massive 1024 bit bus and can handle far higher mem bandwidth than regular gddr5 cards.Yes Polaris is starting to shine while Fiji imo is undergoing the 'Kepler effect'. AMD driver team more focused on their newer cards is my take on it.
Guru01
Senior Member
Posts: 352
Senior Member
Posts: 352
Posted on: 11/07/2017 07:58 AM
This game definitely looks to be an AMD ATI game since I have never seen the Vega 64 come so close to the 1080 Ti. But it runs at 91FPS on my 1070, so i'm happy.
This game definitely looks to be an AMD ATI game since I have never seen the Vega 64 come so close to the 1080 Ti. But it runs at 91FPS on my 1070, so i'm happy.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Posted on: 11/07/2017 08:39 AM
Did you see the vram usage chart?
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-pc-graphics-analysis-benchmark-review,6.html
At 1080p vram is not an issue for 4gb cards. A 4gb 570 is way ahead of FuryX at that res. Also bear in mind that FuryX is HBM with a massive 1024 bit bus and can handle far higher mem bandwidth than regular gddr5 cards.Yes Polaris is starting to shine while Fiji imo is undergoing the 'Kepler effect'. AMD driver team more focused on their newer cards is my take on it.
It is not Kepler effect. Kepler effect means that card was left behind. (Mind that nVidia tried it several times with huge discrepancies in performance and delivered fixes upon community getting angry.)
There are some important changes in Polaris and then Vega. Pre-NCU GPUs are more wasteful in certain situations.
Initially Vega 64 was worse than Fury X in Clock-to-Clock comparison. But with modern content, situation differs.
Yes AMD can do extra optimizations for Fury X here and maybe it will catch up to RX 580. But even at launch of Polaris, certain workloads run like 20% slower on Fury X. If game has a lot of those, then Fury X with that massive 4096SP waits for those other workloads to finish and has no chance to perform at level of RX 580.
Did you see the vram usage chart?
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-pc-graphics-analysis-benchmark-review,6.html
At 1080p vram is not an issue for 4gb cards. A 4gb 570 is way ahead of FuryX at that res. Also bear in mind that FuryX is HBM with a massive 1024 bit bus and can handle far higher mem bandwidth than regular gddr5 cards.Yes Polaris is starting to shine while Fiji imo is undergoing the 'Kepler effect'. AMD driver team more focused on their newer cards is my take on it.
It is not Kepler effect. Kepler effect means that card was left behind. (Mind that nVidia tried it several times with huge discrepancies in performance and delivered fixes upon community getting angry.)
There are some important changes in Polaris and then Vega. Pre-NCU GPUs are more wasteful in certain situations.
Initially Vega 64 was worse than Fury X in Clock-to-Clock comparison. But with modern content, situation differs.
Yes AMD can do extra optimizations for Fury X here and maybe it will catch up to RX 580. But even at launch of Polaris, certain workloads run like 20% slower on Fury X. If game has a lot of those, then Fury X with that massive 4096SP waits for those other workloads to finish and has no chance to perform at level of RX 580.
pages « < 5 6 7 8
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1780
On Ryzen+Radeon system I have not a single problem (well,only Alt+Tab in excess give a crash),everything on High+SMAA @ 1080p (17.10.3 driver),the game looks good,except some ugly flat textures.
On Gtx side will be problems because Vulkan+Async Compute.
@OnnA With Chill will lose some precious frames.
Not a bad game(Imo too much politics),but Wolfenstein The New Order+aclaimed Old Blood is much better.