( Updated )Star Wars Battlefront Benchmarked On Nvidia And AMD, Runs Best On Radeon – Exceptionally Well Optimized Across The Board

[Guest Kloaked]

There are people who got early access beta keys....

So this performance should be in line with what people will experience tomorrow.

 

Also, game wise, it is just more then 1 month to final release. Any major bugs happening during this beta will probably not be fixed in time. Expect the final product to have roughly the same performance as now.

 

I hope dice fixed their netcode though... if not, prepare for shots that never registrer

 

Driver and game updates could be released after launch. It's happened before.

 

Ah here we go, I was looking for this excuse and found it odd that no one posted it.

 

Ah here we go, bogus being bogus as usual.

[Shoob]

The 960 is getting wrecked so hard and R9 290 beats a 970.

These results are kind of questionable, even though Guru3D are a reliable source. We'll see if things change after nvidia roll out their "game optimised" driver.

[Mr_Troll]

Driver and game updates could be released after launch. It's happened before.

 

 

Ah here we go, bogus being bogus as usual.

guru3d benched the NV cards with the latest game ready driver for Battlefront that got released today early in the morning.

[bogus]

Ah here we go, bogus being bogus as usual.

 

Yes, here I am, stating the obvious... it happened with starswarm, it happened with every DX12 benchmark, ofc it would happen with this - the only pattern is AMD then NVIDIA actually doing better in some segments, therefore one must deny the validity of a perfectly valid benchmark.

What's next, NVIDIA didn't had the time to do better WHQL drivers and AMD has beta ones?

[Guest Kloaked]

guru3d benched the NV cards with the latest game ready driver for Battlefront that got released today early in the morning.

 

I'm aware of that.

[Guest Kloaked]

Yes, here I am, stating the obvious... it happened with starswarm, it happened with every DX12 benchmark, ofc it would happen with this - the only pattern is AMD then NVIDIA actually doing better in some segments, therefore one must deny the validity of a perfectly valid benchmark.

What's next, NVIDIA didn't had the time to do better WHQL drivers and AMD has beta ones?

 

I don't know where you're pulling that from.

 

All I said was using software that isn't finalized isn't going to reflect the final product. I'd say the same thing if Nvidia was topping AMD.

 

Stop being an asshole.

[MageTank]

Jesus people, put your brand sponsored weapons aside for a moment. @Kloaked is just saying that games are known to receive updates that changes performance down the line. This has happened historically for almost every AAA game released, ever. Whether it is in the form of a graphics vendor driver update, or a game patch that improves (or decreases) performance.

 

Examples of improvement include games tweaking the engine to have broader hardware support, games that introduce less taxing AA implementations, or games that upgrade to a new API (WoW is a great example).

 

Examples of performance decreasing can come from games that try to force more content on to older engines, and introduce patches that may contain memory leaks or additional particles for a certain object (Perfect World is a great example of this, going from 1.3.6 to 1.4.4). 

 

It is not hard to agree with him, that these results are not concrete just yet, and that anything can happen (for better or for worse) for all sides of the brand spectrum. I swear, you people get out of control with your brand names and are willing to crucify people for what should be seen as obvious facts by now. 

[Samfisher]

Can people stop already with the "fact" that Mantle had anything to do with DX12 and Vulkan being developed?  Mantle at time of announcement had nothing to do with either DX12 or Vulkan development.  Let it rest already.

[bogus]

I don't know where you're pulling that from.

 

All I said was using software that isn't finalized isn't going to reflect the final product. I'd say the same thing if Nvidia was topping AMD.

 

Stop being an asshole.

What I'm saying also applys no matter the outcome of the result. The software was benchmarked as it it. Period. 

Both IHVs put time and effort to make drivers for it. Period.

This is the purpous of a benchmark. It's not stating how shit will be in the future, it states how shit is in the precise moment somone benchmarked it.

 

Not to mention that BETA and FINAL PRODUCT these days means different things from developer to developer.

 

I'm not being an asshole.

[Guest Kloaked]

What I'm saying also applys no matter the outcome of the result. The software was benchmarked as it it. Period. 

Both IHVs put time and effort to make drivers for it. Period.

This is the purpous of a benchmark. It's not stating how shit will be in the future, it states how shit is in the precise moment somone benchmarked it.

 

Not to mention that BETA and FINAL PRODUCT these days means different things from developer to developer.

 

I'm not being an asshole.

 

What you're saying is irrelevant to what I said, and all you're trying to do is stir up some shit. So yes, you are being an asshole.

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

This isn't really a surprise for someone who knows how BF4 performs.

[bogus]

What you're saying is irrelevant to what I said, and all you're trying to do is stir up some shit. So yes, you are being an asshole.

You said this benchmark isn't trustworthy, I'm calling you out for that non sense. 

You are trying to dodge this by insulting me, saying I'm an asshole.

 

[Prysin]

The 960 is getting wrecked so hard and R9 290 beats a 970.

These results are kind of questionable, even though Guru3D are a reliable source. We'll see if things change after nvidia roll out their "game optimised" driver.

http://anandtech.com/show/9698/nvidia-releases-35850-game-ready-drivers-for-star-wars-battlefront

 

this article uses this exact driver....

which is the "game optimized driver".....

 

want to concoct any more excuses?

[Guest Kloaked]

You said this benchmark isn't trustworthy, I'm calling you out for that non sense. 

You are trying to dodge this by insulting me, saying I'm an asshole.

 

Right, because the game could change come launch; the game could perform worse (unlikely) or perform better depending on which vendor GPU you own since the two have various performance gains.

 

You don't have to call me out for saying an unfinished product's benchmark isn't trustworthy for the final product. I don't see how that's nonsense.

[MageTank]

What I'm saying also applys no matter the outcome of the result. The software was benchmarked as it it. Period. 

Both IHVs put time and effort to make drivers for it. Period.

This is the purpous of a benchmark. It's not stating how shit will be in the future, it states how shit is in the precise moment somone benchmarked it.

 

Not to mention that BETA and FINAL PRODUCT these days means different things from developer to developer.

 

I'm not being an asshole.

 

What you're saying is irrelevant to what I said, and all you're trying to do is stir up some shit. So yes, you are being an asshole.

I think what @bogus is saying, is that all benchmarks are to be viewed with the mindset of "As of this moment in time". Meaning, at this moment in time (10/7/2015) These AMD cards are performing X faster than Nvidia cards. He seems to agree that things are subject to change, at least that's the vibe i am getting from him through the context of his posts.

 

Both of you are not wrong. Though, him calling your questioning of a beta game an "excuse" might be a little uncalled for, it's still his opinion to make. The important thing is, we have a point of reference. Now we know what these cards are capable of when it comes to this game right now. We can come back in the future, and see if any progress is made in the future, and have something to compare it to. It also helps people know that their card can handle the game now (assuming a patch does not degrade the performance, in the rare occasion that it could) and that things could only get better from here. 

 

My point is, benchmarking at its core, is just comparing things against each other for a proper frame of reference. They come in all shapes and sizes, from synthetic to real world. Even if it is a beta, it does not make it any less valuable for a frame of reference. We can use it to compare hardware now, and even use it to compare it against future iterations of the software, to see how far it's come in time. 

 

TL:DR? @bogus is right for saying its a valid benchmark. @Kloaked is right in saying that these results are subject to change in the future. Both of you are right. Focus your talents on something far more important, like ending world hunger. Or getting the Kardashians off the air.

[Guest Kloaked]

TL:DR? @bogus is right for saying its a valid benchmark. @Kloaked is right in saying that these results are subject to change in the future. Both of you are right. Focus your talents on something far more important, like ending world hunger. Or getting the Kardashians off the air.

 

I'm too triggered to be productive. I have to become the opposite of a tumblrina.

[Shoob]

http://anandtech.com/show/9698/nvidia-releases-35850-game-ready-drivers-for-star-wars-battlefront

 

this article uses this exact driver....

which is the "game optimized driver".....

 

want to concoct any more excuses?

I didn't read the whole benchmark and I thought that the "optimised' drivers are going to get released later. My apologies.

I'm not concocting any excuses, I just find it a bit surprising as games tend to be heavily nvidia optimised lately. As a Radeon user I'm glad that AMD cards' overall performance isn't gimped by crap like GameWorks.

[rcarteraz]

Thanks for the info!

[bogus]

Right, because the game could change come launch; the game could perform worse (unlikely) or perform better depending on which vendor GPU you own since the two have various performance gains.

 

You don't have to call me out for saying an unfinished product's benchmark isn't trustworthy for the final product. I don't see how that's nonsense.

A game changes through out it's product life cycle - it's software, and software is (usually) target for updates aimed at improvements. So I don't get where you are trying to go with this, because by that logic every game benchmark is not trustworthy until it's final update (both game and drivers).

Now I see that the problem seems to be in your definition of benchmark and what kind of information you are trying to get from it.

A benchmark is a picture in some point in time. You cannot project it to the future, specially with just one point of data... you can't see a trend on this benchmark to claim "AMD will perform better overall in SW BF out of beta" or vice versa. It's impossible to know that.

And because of that you are trying to discredit a benchmark with pretty much one of the most optimized game engines we have, probably more up to date then BF4.

Here are some examples of what kind of information you can get from this benchmark:

- AMD seems to be stepping up their driver game (seen also by other early benchmarks)

- WHQL and Game Optimized Drivers VS Beta drivers, doesn't seem to make much of a difference and currently it seems to play more on the "marketing" side of things... to have some seal of approval that after all doesn't seem to mean much (at least performance wise);

- 980ti seems to be strong either by it's nature, or NVIDIA is putting alot of effort making it the top dog and maybe at the cost of negleting other cards;

- etc;

This is a completly valid benchmark- if you want to make more of it then what it is, then that's your problem.

[Guest Kloaked]

 

 

[Swndlr]

how the hell is the 290x beating the 980 and the fury x is within 5 fps either way of the 980 ti

Cuz AMD...

[Pony080905]

is the beta DX12

[TorqueS]

AMD is coming up more and more as games are launched...What is nVidia doing? First DX12 then Async Compute, now on par performance in SW(for now).

I mean, yeah, 980 Ti, great card, but expensive as f**k. For the mainstream user, the R9s 380 and 390 are becoming the better choices hands down against 960 and 970.

[WaitForMeImOnDialUp]

290x beating gtx 980 is awesome! 980's are like $500 and used 290x in usa is $220

 

and these are benchmarks from dx11, when dx 12 is out shit is gonna get crazy

[Lethal Seraph]

what issues?

 

yes CF profile may or may not be 100% ready atm...

microstutter -> that is a thing of the past...

seriously, ever since AMD stopped using the SLI/CF bridge, microstutter has been nearly eliminated.

I only ever get microstutters during valley with heavy OC.

 

old setup: 2x HD 7950 in CF

current setup: R9 295x2

 

Must have been a faulty clock then or maybe just over OC my 295x2. She was doing 10%OC fine but has microstuttering issue when launching apps, I'm guessing it was power draw making the OC unstable.