[Gamegpu] GTA V PC Benchmark

[x3sphere]

I assume this was at maxed out settings? As these benches are far from reality, with only 2xMSAA at 1080P I have trouble maintaining 60 at all times on a 980 in the areas with lots of grass.

Anywhere else it's usually at 60 but still never averaging anywhere near 110 fps...

I'm happy with the performance though, quite good for an open world game.

Techpowerup: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Rockstar/GTA_V_Performance/3.html

 

[96Firebird]

It is with no AA, and it says they used the last scene of the in-game benchmark. I don't have the game (yet), but I've read the benchmark does not stress the GPU as much as the actual game.

 

[cen1]

TTL: http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/gta_5_amd_vs_nvidia_performance_review/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAa9cbrPqCU

Long story short, 290x destroys 980 in P/P but obviously lags behind. Great framerates for *sync monitors too on high res.

 

[PhIlLy ChEeSe]

Surprisingly decent performance on AMD for a NV GameWorks title.

I was expecting a lot worse.

Also, as expected, the polish site makes AMD look even worse.

I was thinking the same thing, or that the game leaned toward Nvidia(or both).

 

[Silverforce11]

It's been a crazy ride with numbers all over the place from various sites.

Also interesting that computerbase.de says AMD cards crash with NV PCSS shadows, while other reviews test everything with PCSS on. Also we don't know what the performance hit is for running PCSS on AMD cards, but AMD's CHS has a negligible hit on NV cards thanks to CB.de's tests.

Lots of factors due to settings also are at play.

At least for OCN with their youtube run-through on the R290X in realtime, you know their results are real.

 

[Intel FX Master]

I was thinking the same thing, or that the game leaned toward Nvidia(or both).

GTA V is not a gameworks game.

 

[boozzer]

TTL: http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/gta_5_amd_vs_nvidia_performance_review/4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAa9cbrPqCU

Long story short, 290x destroys 980 in P/P but obviously lags behind. Great framerates for *sync monitors too on high res.

wow, I guess this dev didn't need the nvidia money and truly wants gamers from everywhere to enjoy their game. mad props.

 

[skipsneeky2]

It is with no AA, and it says they used the last scene of the in-game benchmark. I don't have the game (yet), but I've read the benchmark does not stress the GPU as much as the actual game.

So true but i have found it useful at least for adjusting my settings.The difference sorta does carry over for sure at least with the avg numbers but the maximum is such a crock.If i gain 15fps avg or so with a certain setting disabled in the benchmark,i see it in-game depending on the location.

 

[Intel FX Master]

wow, I guess this dev didn't need the nvidia money and truly wants gamers from everywhere to enjoy their game. mad props.

Amazing to see such an old GPU stand toe to toe with the best and newest from nvidia.

 

[Stuka87]

EDIT: Oops, didn't see there was 5 pages to this when I first commented

Good to see both makers cards doing decently. I was really fearing that Rockstar would bow to nVidia's cash handout as other game makers have.

 

[Makaveli]

Because GTX 960 is just for physX and i game on GTX 980 SLI.

So you have a very powerful gpu setup how are you finding the game play at the settings you are using?

 

[3DVagabond]

EDIT: Oops, didn't see there was 5 pages to this when I first commented

Good to see both makers cards doing decently. I was really fearing that Rockstar would bow to nVidia's cash handout as other game makers have.

It ended up GE and low and behold... Release day drivers from both IHV's. Why people allow for any other shenanigans is beyond me.

 

[loccothan]

You know its GW & PClab.pl in action when 770 = R290.

yeah so called PClab I don't belive in that (nobody does )
Always have not accurate benches
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are my screens :biggrin:

Phenom II x6 on 3.86 GHz 232FSB (no need for more really)
XFX on 1050/1550 1.175v -4% POW (not even Full Force :ninja: )
1792:1344 85Hz all ULTRA, noAA and no Blur

-> http://loccothan.blogspot.com/p/game-screens-3.html

 

[Intel FX Master]

yeah so called PClab I don't belive in that (nobody does )
Always have not accurate benches
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are my screens :biggrin:

Phenom II x6 on 3.86 GHz 232FSB (no need for more really)
XFX on 1050/1550 1.175v -4% POW (not even Full Force :ninja: )
1792:1344 85Hz all ULTRA, noAA and no Blur

-> http://loccothan.blogspot.com/p/game-screens-3.html

What's your point ?

 

[loccothan]

No Point, Just Gaming

Don't wage Wars between H/W Vendors, it only spread HATE :thumbsdown:
Everybody has what he wants -> I want AMD + Radeon :thumbsup:
Somebody wants Intel + nv is OK to me

just Play and Have Fun :wub: ()

 

[desprado]

AMD Driver overhead

I3 4130 with GTX 750 Ti beating I3 4130 with R9 280 and there no excuse for this plain and simple
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pxeF08qmtg

 

[loccothan]

Grand Theft Auto V Becomes Gaming Evolved Game Title with Contact Hardening Shadows

Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/grand-t...-hardening-shadows_161626#YChV7UFfI4cMRLHM.99

 

[desprado]

Grand Theft Auto V Becomes Gaming Evolved Game Title with Contact Hardening Shadows

Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/grand-t...-hardening-shadows_161626#YChV7UFfI4cMRLHM.99

Seriously i posted this on this first page.This is not AMD evolved or Gameworks game because it is using TXAA ,Nvidia PCSS.

U dont need to get excited for AMD.

 

[Silverforce11]

AMD Driver overhead

I3 4130 with GTX 750 Ti beating I3 4130 with R9 280 and there no excuse for this plain and simple
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pxeF08qmtg

There's no such CPU overhead problem for AMD leading to poor performance in GTA V as you claim. But on quad cores, nope. CF and SLI are matching each other with fps into the 3 digits. It's not a CPU bottleneck if R295X2 scales as well or better than 970 SLI.

There is an adverse effect for AMD GPUs on 2 core CPUs. If you want good performance with AMD GPU, you need a quad core.

 

[Intel FX Master]

Seriously i posted this on this first page.This is not AMD evolved or Gameworks game because it is using TXAA ,Nvidia PCSS.

U dont need to get excited for AMD.

That does not matter at all ... Look at BioShock 3 which is an AMD gaming evolved title with an nvidia "TWIMTBP" splash screen at the start lol.

 

[desprado]

There's no such CPU overhead problem for AMD leading to poor performance in GTA V as you claim. But on quad cores, nope. CF and SLI are matching each other with fps into the 3 digits. It's not a CPU bottleneck if R295X2 scales as well or better than 970 SLI.

There is an adverse effect for AMD GPUs on 2 core CPUs. If you want good performance with AMD GPU, you need a quad core.

There is no excuse for this and cannot be justified because both are on low end CPUs and it shows that how much bottleneck is there.

this is the reason why casual gamer and low end gamers buy Nvidia GPU.


Come on I3 4130 with GTX 750 Ti is 20% to 25% than I3 4130 with R9 280 and normal people can see there is a bottleneck.

This will answer ur question.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...rked-across-14-nvidia-and-amd-graphics-cards/

 

[Silverforce11]

This will answer ur question.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...rked-across-14-nvidia-and-amd-graphics-cards/

"What’s really interesting here is Nvidia’s GTX 970. I mean, look at it! It’s neck and neck with the GTX 980, and the 970 I’m using has reference clocks."

Doesn't match guru3d, computerbase.de, pcgamehardware.de or OCN etc. The 980 is 15-20% faster than 970 in GTA V.

The bottleneck exist, its for dual cores. I tried to find an analysis where AMD was negatively impacted by lower clocks but none showed it. Its negatively affected by dual cores on settings that doesn't stress the GPU.

In your example, the 280X has a lot more GPU grunt, so to take advantage of it, you need an i5. In that case, it ends up 90 fps vs 60 fps against the 750ti.

 

[casiofx]

"What’s really interesting here is Nvidia’s GTX 970. I mean, look at it! It’s neck and neck with the GTX 980, and the 970 I’m using has reference clocks."

Doesn't match guru3d, computerbase.de, pcgamehardware.de or OCN etc. The 980 is 15-20% faster than 970 in GTA V.

The bottleneck exist, its for dual cores. I tried to find an analysis where AMD was negatively impacted by lower clocks but none showed it. Its negatively affected by dual cores on settings that doesn't stress the GPU.

In your example, the 280X has a lot more GPU grunt, so to take advantage of it, you need an i5. In that case, it ends up 90 fps vs 60 fps against the 750ti.

HINT: Somebody forgotten about the previous top of the line 780 Ti

HINT 2: He was previous 780 Ti user

And nobody is fussing about this but hey, slamming AMD is much more fun.

Get over it, what people needs to overcome the driver overhead is pretty simple, get a balanced build of proper CPU and GPU, done. Was the i5 4460 overly expensive anyways?

 

[csbin]

http://www.techspot.com/review/991-gta-5-pc-benchmarks/page3.html

 

[skipsneeky2]

1gb gtx650 results at 1366x768 all minimum outside of 16xaf and population density and distance scaling maxed.Vram usage hits 997mb while any other settings go pass pegging the 1gb.

Frames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 23.951298, 68.619865, 54.588207
Pass 1, 47.107800, 88.441795, 70.489258
Pass 2, 38.874527, 100.878143, 75.689018
Pass 3, 29.931765, 85.076729, 71.068977
Pass 4, 20.530666, 119.398071, 66.921593

Card runs the game damn smooth,it was paired with a i3 3220.I notice occasional low gpu usage in-game which means a i5 could open up perhaps a few more fps.