[PCGAMESHARDWARE.DE] DOOM Benchmarks

[railven]

I don't need to relax. Me getting up tight wouldn't effect anything and I've learned not to bother.

Thanks for the clarification. So on Medium settings AMD's performance is still OK?

Judging by them almost hitting 60 FPS at Ultra/Nightmare configs, I'd assume at Medium/High they'll get 60 FPS easily.

 

[Erenhardt]

So after adding quick bolt-on graphical effects that were not there in beta we see a dramatic change in GPU performance stack?

I wonder if it will take the same 3 weeks as in every GW game for a patch to come out :sneaky:

Also, there was always a problem with benchmarking amd cards in Idtech. Something with performance Overlay halving fps.

 

[Vaporizer]

Usual for a game in which the green slug has influnce in.

Warning issued for trolling

 

[guskline]

Just bought it last night. CD keys had it for $39.99! Let it download and played a bit on my 5960x rig below. Graphics are incredible. Fun shooter.

 

[Shmee]

I heard newegg had it for 15, but its oos now.

 

[Ranulf]

Just bought it last night. CD keys had it for $39.99! Let it download and played a bit on my 5960x rig below. Graphics are incredible. Fun shooter.

Any issues with cdkeys? I've heard rumors it wasn't working for some. Others have had no problems buying from them.

 

[Innokentij]

16 hours into it atm, playing on 1440p with nightmare gfx quality setting unlike those noob review sites that is on pesant ultra settings and it runs great on 980TI. The game lighthing, particle and shadows looks great, the texture is sub par compared to battlefield/cod/crysis and is on par with fallout 4. The loading of textures has not been a problem unlike rage that was horrible, it's miles ahead of wolfenstein to. My friend has a 970 and installed on normal HDD and he says he still experience it so ur experience might be different then mine. All in all a great game for me, will recomend if you like action shooters and hunting for secrets.

 

[4K_shmoorK]

Any issues with cdkeys? I've heard rumors it wasn't working for some. Others have had no problems buying from them.

Been buying from cdkeys for almost a year now (5-6 games). Never had a problem and key delivery has always been instant. $35 AAA new releases makes it a no-brainer for me.

 

[Madpacket]

I know everyone likes to show the latest benchmarks with high end gear but all my high end gear is mining ATM. Nice to see the Fury / 380 is doing but well but pretty surprised how poorly it runs on the 780/290 era cards. There's no good reason a 960 or 380 should be outperforming these faster cards. I'm sure AMD will fix the performance like they normally do, but not sure about Nvidia though, hopefully they address the 680/780 series cards.

So for the low end stuff;

So far I've only played the game on an i7 Alpha (750 ti) and a Radeon 7850 APU. The game plays/looks great at 1600P/1080P on a 750 Ti with a mix of medium and high settings.

I played through the first three levels and had no issues. It runs approx. 40-60 FPS and looks amazing.

What really surprised is me is replaying the same 3 levels on my 7850K APU from my couch and it actually runs really well albeit at low settings and lower resolutions. So yes you can play this game on an a 7850K APU if you realistically turn down the settings. At 720P / Low settings the game still looks pretty decent at least from 10 feet away on a large screen TV. The game runs roughly 35-60 FPS. In heavier firefights the CPU/GPU actually keeps up where you don't feel like if you die it's because of low FPS.

Just thought I would add my observations here for anyone who has more modest gear

Oh, and anyone on the fence please buy this game, it's excellent! easily my game of the year so far.

 

[Krteq]

AMD Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.5.2.1 Release Notes

Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.5.2.1 Highlights

• Performance increase by up to 35% on AMD Radeon R9 390 series products in Doom™ versus Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.5.2(1)

 

[Bacon1]

Updated drivers released - http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-art...e-crimson-edition-16.5.2.1-release-notes.aspx

35% perf increase for 390. Went from 70 -> 95 fps @ 1080p.

 

[railven]

Good game AMD. Now tell Roy Taylor to apologize to people who said something was wrong.

Anyone know if this brings it up to 4.5 OpenGL or does it stay at 4.3 but still see an improvement?

 

[omek]

Updated drivers released - http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-art...e-crimson-edition-16.5.2.1-release-notes.aspx

35% perf increase for 390. Went from 70 -> 95 fps @ 1080p.

Good deal. AMD's quicker than they ever have been at rectifying issues. I have the feeling they will be able to squeeze another 10-20% with the looks of the benchmarks.

Gonna try this on my 290x.

 

[railven]

Dang AMD, you should have contacted DF because now the bad news is out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNE_P-g_-Ts

I won't expect DF to do a follow up video for a while. It will just be an "update" buried in their review.

EDIT: This is all starting to put the PCGamer article to doubt. They appear to be the outlier in the recent findings.

 

[SPBHM]

35% is not enough for the 390 to compete with the 970...
I think it's odd that some people can't accept OpenGL is a big factor of what's going on, when the game is worse than the GameWorks stuff.

 

[Silverforce11]

I played the beta. My OSD said OpenGL 4.5 for the 290X.

This is very suspicious to go from great performance, to a release so neutered and gimped with OpenGL 4.3 only for AMD.

Coincidence that ID Software was promoting Pascal live to the world? Meh.

 

[omek]

16.5.2.1 made a world of difference, from 35-40fps minimums to 70fps minimums in the thick of it, Ultra settings.

It's beyond 35%. AMD probably staying on the conservative side, it's as if a switch was flipped.

 

[railven]

I played the beta. My OSD said OpenGL 4.5 for the 290X.

This is very suspicious to go from great performance, to a release so neutered and gimped with OpenGL 4.3 only for AMD.

Coincidence that ID Software was promoting Pascal live to the world? Meh.

Great performance on fixed settings doesn't mean anything.

For all we know the game was running terrible during Beta but we didn't see it due to lowered settings.

EDIT: If AMD didn't request/given code, they might have assumed everything was fine and dandy.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

When is the Vulkan update coming? I don't want to buy before that's implemented.

 

[railven]

When is the Vulkan update coming? I don't want to buy before that's implemented.

"Soon"

https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/731017593104949249

 

[3DVagabond]

When is the Vulkan update coming? I don't want to buy before that's implemented.

Might as well weight until the game is finished, right?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Might as well weight until the game is finished, right?

The game seems finished to me, but I guess let's bash the game because it had a few issues running on a certain subset of AMD cards that have since been resolved

 

[Madpacket]

The game is perfectly playable today. If you can get a good deal I wouldn't wait. It's not like Vulkan is going to make a difference if you're already getting a solid 60 FPS.

 

[SPBHM]

16.5.2.1 made a world of difference, from 35-40fps minimums to 70fps minimums in the thick of it, Ultra settings.

It's beyond 35%. AMD probably staying on the conservative side, it's as if a switch was flipped.

hopefully Digital Foundry will test again, Tiago Sousa seems happy with his 390
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/732344715379515392

 

[exar333]

When is the Vulkan update coming? I don't want to buy before that's implemented.

Doesn't that question just sound crazy? Not bashing anyone, just thinking no one in their right mind 6 months ago would have claimed a game would have better Vulkan support on NV.