Review: Battlefield V: PC graphics performance benchmarks analysis

schmidtbag

2018-11-09 18:36

This review is incomplete - there's no benchmark for Degree of Butthurt, Historical Accuracy Index, or SJW Approval Ratings. I need to know how much I'm supposed to hate this game 😛.

Netherwind:

It's interesting how EA manages to make reviewers job unnecessarily difficult by having this hardware change restriction in all their games.

That's probably because they expect the reviewers to get fed up and just buy more licenses.

#5605251

BReal85

2018-11-09 18:39

Vega 64 on par with the RTX 2070 in 1440P and beating it on FHD, LOL! Nicely done.

#5605276

Robbo9999

2018-11-09 19:22

Very impressive AMD Vega performance in comparison to NVidia, but disappointed with the fairly low fps at only 1080p resolution on high end cards. But, I am interested to see the inclusion of different CPUs within this article (which Hilbert has promised somewhere above) - perhaps the likes of 9900K/8700K/(hell maybe even 7700K) can push a stable 144 fps at 1080p for those high refresh rate screens. I'm hoping my 6700K at 4.65Ghz will be able to push a pretty stable 144fps, looking to this review to see how likely that's gonna be! (Would be interested to see performance of sensibly overclocked CPUs in this review too).

#5605291

Quicks

2018-11-09 19:36

Why test the 470 8GB and 570 8GB if its basicly the same card, why not a 4GB of one of the two?

#5605322

Koniakki

2018-11-09 20:22

Respects to HH. I hope we all members and others understand the extra unnecessary difficulties/expenses HH is going though just to provide this as early as possible. We all appreciated it! P.S: And it's good to see the 1080Ti(stock FE) doing 60fps@4K! Nice!

#5605338

Srsbsns

2018-11-09 20:54

Is this a case of AMD fine wine or is Nvidia gimping the 1080? I'm no GPU scientist but I thought there was not too much difference between the 1080 and 2080.

#5605340

schmidtbag

2018-11-09 20:57

Srsbsns:

Is this a case of AMD fine wine or is Nvidia gimping the 1080? I'm no GPU scientist but I thought there was not too much difference between the 1080 and 2080.

To my recollection, the 2080 has similar performance to the 1080Ti, which these benchmarks are consistent with. So, I wouldn't say Nvidia is gimping anything. And, I'd say this is also a case of AMD GPUs aging well (that, and they seem to team up with EA for optimizations pretty often).

#5605347

Kaarme

2018-11-09 21:10

Netherwind:

It's interesting how EA manages to make reviewers job unnecessarily difficult by having this hardware change restriction in all their games. They're great at pushing the break instead of gas for some reason. I imagine it wouldn't be impossible for them to disable the restriction on reviewer keys.

schmidtbag:

That's probably because they expect the reviewers to get fed up and just buy more licenses.

I'm fairly sure they don't even want these kinds of reviews in the first place. The only kind of reviews they want are the type that only praise the game with no criticism. Performance reviews are unwanted because they fear someone with a more lower mainstream card would hesitate to buy the game when they see how the better cards are so far above theirs. No matter how it's clearly said in the graph that Ultra quality setting has been used, and thus more performance would be gained by lowering the setting. No doubt EA also doesn't want to read how the top card owners are baffled by "poor" results.

#5605371

Dimitrios1983

2018-11-09 22:09

Thanks for the review and your time on this Hilbert.

#5605403

zimzoid

2018-11-09 23:53

Good performance for hehe and with an old 980ti and 4930k cpu at 1440p

#5605405

RooiKreef

2018-11-10 00:01

Nice to see AMD cards running so nice on this game for a change. Maybe it’s the DX12?

#5605411

Yogi

2018-11-10 00:34

I'm surprised to see the 1060 6GB, and the Fury's performing worse than the RX470 almost across the board. Is VRAM really that much of a limitation? Also how much of that VRAM that is loaded is required in any given scenario? I'm kinda curious to see how a GTX 970 and R9 290 4GB would hold up. Keep up the good work HH, It's much appreciated!

#5605416

Netherwind

2018-11-10 01:01

Kaarme:

I'm fairly sure they don't even want these kinds of reviews in the first place. The only kind of reviews they want are the type that only praise the game with no criticism. Performance reviews are unwanted because they fear someone with a more lower mainstream card would hesitate to buy the game when they see how the better cards are so far above theirs. No matter how it's clearly said in the graph that Ultra quality setting has been used, and thus more performance would be gained by lowering the setting. No doubt EA also doesn't want to read how the top card owners are baffled by "poor" results.

How can a company do business if it doesn't even believe in it's own product?

#5605430

HARDRESET

2018-11-10 02:39

Rx4speed:

DX12 is trash in BF1. No one runs it for competitive play. Same engine, and DX12 with RTX is somehow gonna be great on BFV? OK. I canceled my $85 US pre-order this morning because I'm locked out until next Wednesday while access premier members play the full game right now. I was one of the 1st people to play DICE's Desert Combat mod of BF1942 back in the day. I'm done.

Runs fine in DX12 or DX11 [youtube=6gZWOxhBSFQ] [youtube=3nTCs9d1VCo] [youtube=_Kb7zXAn8Yw]

#5605470

Irenicus

2018-11-10 07:44

Keesberenburg:

CPU bottlenek i think, i getting 107 fps ultra 2560x1440p with my GTX 1080 Ti and stock i7 8700k.

I'm very curious why you'd have an 8700k at stock speeds? You're missing out on massive, free performance gains there. These results are pretty darn awful tbh.

Ridiric:

Just thought I would post some info, my GTX 980 on High settings (which look pretty close to ultra) gets between 80fps and 100fps while running around on the ground and 90 to 120 while flying in a plane in multiplayer, single player performance is lower and is generally 80fps with some dips into 70fps. Oh and I'm also running my card at 1440mhz core and 7500mhz memory, cause its summer and things get hot here in Australia 🙂

Not a big difference in GPU temps regardless of OC, at least on my 1060 Also, it's not summer yet mate, it's still spring 😉

#5605482

Noisiv

2018-11-10 09:48

Good decision to use DX12! Even if it's less performing than DX11, it is the way forward. And it gives incentive to both devs and AMD/NV to get their act together.

#5605493

Keesberenburg

2018-11-10 11:04

Irenicus:

I'm very curious why you'd have an 8700k at stock speeds? You're missing out on massive, free performance gains there. These results are pretty darn awful tbh. Not a big difference in GPU temps regardless of OC, at least on my 1060 Also, it's not summer yet mate, it's still spring 😉

Im getting more AVG FPS then most reviews even with no overclock. Do you heve some benchmarks what a i7 8700k above 4300mhz gains?

#5605495

Ricepudding

2018-11-10 11:14

Keesberenburg:

CPU bottlenek i think, i getting 107 fps ultra 2560x1440p with my GTX 1080 Ti and stock i7 8700k.

Makes the GPU a bit more laughable tbh, it's so close to 1080ti performance but costs twice as much 😀 Think with the new 9900k there might be some differences, Haswell-E is getting pretty old now @Hilbet Hagedoom What do you reckon? the Haswell-E capping newer games now? or is it just very poor optimisation on EA's part

#5605497

Fediuld

2018-11-10 11:24

Keesberenburg:

Dream on

LOL. Ignorance is bliss? Have a look here a custom watercooled Vega 64 I know the guy and his settings, trying to keep the card at 300W max. [youtube=t6GHWmqpC0Q] A Nitro on air is just 3-4% slower.

#5605501

Rx4speed

2018-11-10 11:43

zimzoid:

Good performance for hehe and with an old 980ti and 4930k cpu at 1440p

The 980ti is still a great card and a great buy used.