So another game that bust both the DX12 and Kepler driver myth.
Clearly not looking at the same benchmarks as everyone else is. Let's add launch prices too to make it clearer for you:
$299 R9 280X
> $449 770 4GB
$399 R9 290
~ $699 GTX780Ti
> $500-650 GTX780
$549 R9 290X
> $699 780Ti
Then again, maybe in your world when Kepler isn't behind by 20-30%, it's not gimped, since you also conveniently ignore that this is a UE4 title that normally favours NV and that each Kepler GPU that loses to its GCN equivalent cost substantially more during that generation's life cycle.
Ironic how you didn't even mention that at 1440p UQ the $280-325 R9 290X is just 3 fps behind the $550 GTX980. You do remember that during the 980 vs. R9 290X era the latter card cost
less than half the price. In this context once we add launch prices, the performance of GTX770, 780, 780Ti and 980 is underwhelming.
Yeah, it's weird, because the game isn't very CPU dependent at all..
Are we looking at the same benchmarks? FX8370 at ComputerBase.de is bottlenecking NV's cards compared to the same GPUs running on 6700K.
i7 6700K
GTX970 = 62.9 fps
R9 390 = 67.9 fps
FX 8370
GTX 970 = 48.1 fps
R9 390 = 61.9 fps
GameGPU shows 2600K and i7 6700 demolishing 2500K and i5 6600. It takes at least an i5 6600 to hit maintain 60 fps minimums.
So much for Core i5 defenders on this forum. i7 2600K > i5 6600
Sandy
i7 2600K = 88 fps minimums
i5 2500K = 45 fps minimums
Skylake
i7 6700 = 112 fps minimums
i5 6600 = 60 fps minimums
Gears of War 4 is an exceptionally optimized DX12 title. It even makes use of tiled resources, a highly useful feature that came out with DX11.2 but that no game developer has used to my knowledge.
It's not impressive when the game looks worse than Crysis 2, and by far worse than Crysis Warhead or Metro 2033/Last Light/Rise of the Tomb Raider/Deus Ex Mankind Divided/Crysis 3, etc. This is a straight up console port, with mainly shadows and SSR superior on the PC. The graphics are average at best for a 2016 game.
Zooming in on the screenshots or watching a Candyland video reveals low-polygon character models, mediocre textures, nothing special lighting effects/particle effects/smoke effects. Up-close the vegetation, rocks/terrain looks terrible for a 2016 DX12 PC game. Ironic how you dismissed the gorgeous Forza Horizon 3 (even though it was poorly optimized), but are calling this an exceptionally optimized DX12 title!
Motion blur does not make a 2016 PC game next gen.
Candyland: Gears of War 4 – PC Ulltra vs. Xbox One:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LXEBeTezh8
Graphics are nothing special, I'd even call them mediocre for 2016. No wonder R9 290 is hitting 70 fps at 1080p UQ at GameGPU.