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

[don_svetlio]

46 fps when absolutely maxed out ULTRA settings at 1080p. With a budget-midrange GPU.

I am not denying that AMD is faster. They are. Just saying that NVIDIA users will have a very good experience too.

True - when you set it to lower settings the 960 will do 60 fps.

[patrickjp93]

So, stock speeds on all cards, and we all know how well Maxwell overclocks... And the article title isn't even consistent with the results...

[don_svetlio]

So, stock speeds on all cards, and we all know how well Maxwell overclocks... And the article title isn't even consistent with the results...

Citation needed. That is anything you are going to hear from me until you prove at least 1 of your points

[Bouzoo]

Citation needed. That is anything you are going to hear from me until you prove at least 1 of your points

 

Let's calm down. He only said the truth, those are stock speeds and Maxwell OC's quite good. And to someone who loves NV more than AMD, with AMD winning by a lot, these results won't show "exceptional optimization across the board". 

No need for citations. This is not a debate. Let's keep the tensions as low as possible. 

[Dabombinable]

Citation needed. That is anything you are going to hear from me until you prove at least 1 of your points

Quote: "Sshhh, don't feed the troll"

Which is something that your managing to avoid-feeding it that is.

[don_svetlio]

Let's calm down. He only said the truth, those are stock speeds and Maxwell OC's quite good. And to someone who loves NV more than AMD, these results won't show "exceptional optimization across the board". 

No need for citations. This is not a debate. Let's keep the tensions as low as possible. 

It is - GPU Boost 2.0 can get a Maxwell card to 1400 out of the box. That is not stock.

[ybriK]

Holy shit this is interesting as fuck, a 290X on par and beating a 980 where in the world did the word "optimization" get to? Damn just imagine team red rising up again like in the old days. I'm really hoping the hype for DX12 is real I want match point competition in the future going on here like these benchmarks.

[Kobz360]

So, stock speeds on all cards, and we all know how well Maxwell overclocks... And the article title isn't even consistent with the results...

Even if all the cards at stock, you never expect a 290X (a card originally made to compete with the 780) to ever beat a 980 at 1080p. This was definitely not seen with Battlefield 4 either... Not going to really address the whole overclock thing any further though.. it's been beaten to death on this site. 

 

Still gotta wait until the game releases though and everyone's drivers have matured, though I don't really see there being a substantial difference from what we see here. 

[Khvarrioiren]

So, stock speeds on all cards, and we all know how well Maxwell overclocks... And the article title isn't even consistent with the results...

 

The actual performance gains are in line with Kepler, Maxwell is weaker clock for clock.

[dimitriianghelov]

i wonder if we're gonna get like 50(at 4k) fps with released game /drivers , it would be awesome

[Bouzoo]

It is - GPU Boost 2.0 can get a Maxwell card to 1400 out of the box. That is not stock.

Where did you get such a number? I'm seeing it for the first time. 

For instance, the 980 goes to 1200ish with 2.0 (w/o changing voltage) and OC's to 1500ish manually, I don't look at this as an OC,  even though I should. (2.0 gives it about 100 MHz from stock 1126). 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

[don_svetlio]

Where did you get such a number? I'm seeing it for the first time. 

For instance, the 980 goes to 1200ish with 2.0 (w/o changing voltage) and OC's to 1500ish manually, I don't look at this as an OC,  even though I should. (2.0 gives it about 100 MHz from stock 1126). 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

Have you heard of the term "silicon lottery"? No? I thought so.

[Bouzoo]

Have you heard of the term "silicon lottery"? No? I thought so.

 

Silicon lottery or not, 1400 MHz on 2.0 is not happening. Please back up your statement. You were just calling out patrickjp93 for that. I don't remember ever seeing it giving more than 100-150, let alone 300 or 400 MHz (because that needs playing with voltages and afaik 2.0 can't do that).

[don_svetlio]

Silicon lottery or not, 1400 MHz on 2.0 is not happening. Please back up your statement. You were just calling out patrickjp93 for that. I don't remember ever seeing it giving more than 100-150, let alone 300 or 400 MHz (because that needs playing with voltages and afaik 2.0 can't do that).

960 @ 1350 out of the box. Enjoy

http://techreport.com/review/27806/five-geforce-gtx-960-cards-overclocked/2

[patrickjp93]

Citation needed. That is anything you are going to hear from me until you prove at least 1 of your points

Which part? For consistency, Maxwell wins in 1080p and 1440p is a virtual tie near across the board. It's only in 4K AMD pulls ahead, and that's a small margin.

[don_svetlio]

Which part? For consistency, Maxwell wins in 1080p and 1440p is a virtual tie near across the board. It's only in 4K AMD pulls ahead, and that's a small margin.

Citation needed

[Bouzoo]

960 @ 1350 out of the box. Enjoy

http://techreport.com/review/27806/five-geforce-gtx-960-cards-overclocked/2

 

That's a <70 MHz OC. Figured you were talking about few hundred MHZ OC's with 2.0. Forgot they had such high stock speeds. 

[ShadowCaptain]

my 780ti clings on there nearly 60fps at 1440p, im sure with a setting or two I can easily get 60+ consistent

[patrickjp93]

Even if all the cards at stock, you never expect a 290X (a card originally made to compete with the 780) to ever beat a 980 at 1080p. This was definitely not seen with Battlefield 4 either... Not going to really address the whole overclock thing any further though.. it's been beaten to death on this site.

Still gotta wait until the game releases though and everyone's drivers have matured, though I don't really see there being a substantial difference from what we see here.

I would. More stream processors and more flops means higher potential, regardless of AMD's driver situation in DX 11 which we all know was atrocious. AMD also has significantly higher bandwidth between the 290X and the 980. It should have been obvious from the get go given DX 12 is far less reliant on driver optimization that this was going to happen. The idea AMD is still on par only is what's hilarious.

[patrickjp93]

Citation needed

See the benches posted at the very top of the article at the top of this thread...

[don_svetlio]

See the benches posted at the very top of the article at the top of this thread...

[Kobz360]

I would. More stream processors and more flops means higher potential, regardless of AMD's driver situation in DX 11 which we all know was atrocious. AMD also has significantly higher bandwidth between the 290X and the 980. It should have been obvious from the get go given DX 12 is far less reliant on driver optimization that this was going to happen. The idea AMD is still on par only is what's hilarious.

These are DX11 benchmarks..

[don_svetlio]

That's a <70 MHz OC. Figured you were talking about few hundred MHZ OC's with 2.0. Forgot they had such high stock speeds. 

the EVGA 960 FTW starts out at 1450 boost

[patrickjp93]

I don't understand why this is a big deal. I always cite a source. I figured since it's in the damn article of the thread there wouldn't be a need to rehash it, but ok. I swear some of you are purposely obtuse and impossible to please.

[Bouzoo]

the EVGA 960 FTW starts out at 1450 boost

Honestly, it would've been so much easier if they just wrote what editions of cards they used since we can see 1 WF card in the bench . Then I could maybe have an argument if the cards in the benchmarks are the best or worst possible scenarios for the specific cards and if the 2.0 makes such a difference here.