Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review

post #1 of 94
Thread Starter 
Performance analysis article is up for COD BO III.
Quote:
Yeah, it is time for the once in a year opportunity and yearly cash-cow from Activision and the treyarch studios, the latest iteration of Call of Duty Black Ops 3 has been released. Call of Duty: Black Ops III is a military science fiction first-person shooter video game, developed by Treyarch and published by Activision. It is the twelfth (yep you read that well - 12th) iteration of the Call of Duty series and the sequel to the 2012 video game Call of Duty: Black Ops II. It is released on several platforms, ours .. Microsoft Windows and then PlayStation 4, and Xbox One. For this article we take out a dozen or so graphics cards and benchmark thr game. We have a look at DX11 performance with the newest graphics cards and technologies. This article will cover benchmarks in the sense of average framerates, we'll look at all popular resolutions scaling from Full HD (1920x1080/1200), WHQD (2560x1440 and of course that big-whopper of a resolution Ultra HD. UHDTV (2160p) is 3840 pixels wide by 2160 pixels tall (8.29 megapixels), which is four times as many pixels as 1920x1080 (2.07 megapixels).

Black Ops III will be a popular title and is looking OK from a graphics point of view. The release of Call of Duty remains a little weird for the PC as it is only 64-bit, and thus that requires a 64-bit operating system- this in fact eliminates a number of customers. A second requirement for the game is that you need to have at least 6 GB of memory. If you have 3 or 4 GB installed, the game will not start-up, but for previous releases patches inevitably did fix this and 4 GB at one point was allowed. The game engine itself is fairly equal to the its predecessor and with all tricks and bells enabled, it does look okay if your graphics card can manage it of course. COD however always is tricky to benchmark as the results are and always will be a little unreliable. One test run will result on 40 FPS, the second 36 FPS and another 33 FPS. Then another factor is a need to be taken into account as well, some levels average out at say 40 FPS, yet there are a handful of scenes (with helicopters and such) where the frame rate will crumble down. Now 80% of the game plays with good playable framerates, but a handful of levels will just stall any graphics card whatsoever.

Important note:

This morning For the 6 hours straight I had been trying to retrieve reliable FPS numbers from the game, but as it stands it is a bit of a mess. Framerates fly up and down per mission / scene and are all over the place. Sometimes 30 FPS, and the next second 60 FPS. Sometimes measuring 1902x1080 and 2560x1440 will retrieve the very same FPS (while VSYNC is off), and next to that the Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 executable often crashes during start-up of the game. Selecting the AA modes does not have a performance impact whatsoever, which makes me wonder if they actually work as configured.

The game is not bad when is works, 8GB RAM memory systems you will get full RAM utilization as if the game is caching to the max. We did not get many stutters opposed to what it reported on the WWW though. With our 16GB system things definitely felt and ran a notch better. From a graphics point of view the game digs DEEPLY into your framerate when you open up all graphics quality settings, it will have an adverse effect on game performance. The problem however remains, the game looks good ... but remains to be just that -- nothing excels in PC graphics quality to a level that amazes. When it works the game does run smooth enough on pretty much any modern age graphics card.


So the results you see today are INDICATIVE and not precise. This game is a mess to measure. We found a sweet spot setting that works pretty good and measure in a level (In Darkness Quarantine Zone, Singapore) that allows fairly consistent frame-rates. However the number you see WILL change even your GTX 980 TI or Fury X at one point will drop to 30 FPS These means that the results shown today are indicative, not a precise measurement by any standard

Please click on source to view all performance charts!

SOURCE
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 94
Why the hell is the difference between the 390X (8GB) and the 290X (4GB) higher at 1080p than it is at 1440p or even 4K?

Either I am missing something or it doesn't make any sense at all.
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 94
Thread Starter 
What the? Look at the 290X vs 390X at 1080p! Something is wrong with that result. It is not the VRAM because at 1440p, the 290X and 390X perform within 5fps of each other. (And Fury only has 4GB and that seems to be doing fine).



I can understand the 780 Ti doing badly since Nvidia decided to drop it to make their newer line up look good, but the 290X and 390X are not that much different at all. Either it is bad testing or it's been done deliberately to boost hardware sales.
Edited by BradleyW - 11/6/15 at 2:35pm
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by zealord View Post

Why the hell is the difference between the 390X (8GB) and the 290X (4GB) higher at 1080p than it is at 1440p or even 4K?

Either I am missing something or it doesn't make any sense at all.
the game optimization?
post #5 of 94
Looks like this game eats up Vram for breakfast.
Giga Buster
(15 items)
 
Mega Buster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI RX 470 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
COMPAQ WF1907 CM Storm Devastator EVGA 700W 80+ Bronze RAIDMAX VORTEX 
MouseMouse PadAudio
CM Storm Devastator AULA Onboard Realtek Audio 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1600T @3.8ghz 1.325v M5A99X EVO EVGA GTX 460 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3  Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER 17 inch Agiler Antec 520-HCG Super T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
EUROCASE None Onboard VIA HD 
  hide details  
Reply
Giga Buster
(15 items)
 
Mega Buster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI RX 470 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
COMPAQ WF1907 CM Storm Devastator EVGA 700W 80+ Bronze RAIDMAX VORTEX 
MouseMouse PadAudio
CM Storm Devastator AULA Onboard Realtek Audio 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1600T @3.8ghz 1.325v M5A99X EVO EVGA GTX 460 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3  Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER 17 inch Agiler Antec 520-HCG Super T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
EUROCASE None Onboard VIA HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 94
I would be very interested in CF 390X 8GB vs CF 290X 4GB in 1080p/1440p/2160p.
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
current rig
(4 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsGraphicsKeyboard
2500k R9 290X Tri-X GTX 680 Filco Majestouch 2 Brown Ninja 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 94
Thread Starter 
This is silly now. GameGPU have the 290X running at min 24fps @ 1080p.
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/call-of-duty-black-ops-iii-test-gpu.html

Edit:

Also, check out this memory management!



Something is a miss here.
Edited by BradleyW - 11/6/15 at 2:52pm
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
X79-GCN
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930K 4.5GHz HT GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 AMD R9-290X GEil Evo Potenza DDR3 2400MHz CL10 (4x4GB) 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 120GB EK Supremacy (CPU) NF F12's P/P (360 Rad)  NF A14's (420 Rad)  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Chrome Compression Fittings EK RES X3 150 Primochill PremoFlex Advanced LRT Clear 1/2 ID EK-FC (R9 290X) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK D5 Vario Top-X  Phobya G-Changer V2 360mm Phobya G-Changer V2 420mm Win 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ XR3501 35" Curved Corsair Vengeance K90 Seasonic X-1250 Gold (v2) Corsair 900D 
MouseAudio
Logitech G400s Senn HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 94
What a waste of time and resources benching a game that is BROKE at launch. Bench when it is actually you know FIXED!
post #9 of 94
What i don't understand is why the game is so hardware intensive when they say it has OK graphics at best. Reeks of poor optimization. I play exclusively at 4K and this thing gets an average of 31 fps?! What the...?! I mean I get slightly better frame rate than that in AC Unity and that thing looks awesome. Hell, Ryse looks worlds apart better than this garbage and I getter better frame rate than that.
Glad I didn't buy this garbage!
post #10 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage101 View Post

Looks like this game eats up ram for breakfast.
FTFY

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Guru3D] Call of Duty: Black Ops III PC graphics performance benchmark review