Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › [Various] Far Cry: Primal Reviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Various] Far Cry: Primal Reviews - Page 2

post #11 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalinTM View Post

On those kind of tests, they probably use 970 and 980 with stock nvidia clocks. A 1500mhz and mem oc-ed 980 will perform much better.

That is why they listed both overclocked cards and stock cards.

The 980 Ti G1 Gaming is custom overclocked and the 980 Strix aswell. Maybe they are not at their limit, but neither are the AMD cards. Yes I know Maxwell overclocks much better than Fiji/Hawaii.
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 #12 of 61
The aftermarket 980 is ahead of the aftermarket 390x at 1080P & 1440P , performance seems about right on both sides?
post #13 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by zealord View Post

970 and 980 are looking really bad. Nvidia will probably release a driver soon.

They probably don't want to see their 500$ GTX 980 being beaten by a 320$ R9 390

both sites benched with NV's beta "game ready". tongue.gif
http://www.computerbase.de/2016-02/far-cry-primal-benchmarks/2/
Quote:
As driver of the Crimson 16.2 Beta and the GeForce 362.00 are uploaded.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Far-Cry-Primal-Spiel-56176/Specials/Benchmark-Test-1187476/
Quote:
Note that we have received from Nvidia on request in advance the "game ready" driver 362.00 and used for the benchmarks.

unless chrome didn't translate correctly.
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
Reply
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 61
Also, ubisoft games tend to be poorly optimized at start. Ubisoft after some months (when almost all ppl. played the game) will have a optimized game. Take for example AC syndicate, like, now, the game plays well. And in the past they did the same, watch dogs, ac unity.

So, after some months this game will probably run different, by a large degree. The drivers will be mature till then too.

But i assume that in some future patches they will include HBAO+ (almost sure), and probably PCSS and many more. I hope only HBAO+, since that is the only thing that does its job from the gameworks suite.

Also, bear in mind that this game is placed in a deep forest. There are lots of vegetation around, lots of shadows, also uses volumetric fog, which tanks the performance (u can check the division as well, it has it too). The vegetation + other effects around that, will tank every rig out there.

Because all vegetation-only games tank performance. Vegetation is a hard ass rendering.

Also, u can see why the game has no other AA, besides FXAA and SMAA. If u apply some MSAA/TXAA/MFAA etc. to a game, and then travel to an area where is vegetation around, u will see that the AA will use much more horsepower than, the same AA on an urban area, for example.
Edited by CalinTM - 2/29/16 at 3:02pm
PC
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i7 3770K @4.5Ghz (Multiplier OC) 1... MSI Z77A-GD65 [10.10 BIOS] MSi GTX 980 GAMING + MX4 @1544mhz/1.262v; +450M... Geil Black Dragon 4x4Gb 1866Mhz [XMP] 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 EVO 500Gb [AHCI] Noctua NH-D14 Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 10586.420 (FPP/retail key) BenQ XL2411T [Dual-Link DVI, 144Hz] AUO M24HW01... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Ultimate 2014 [green switches] Enermax Revolution 87+ 750W and APC Back-UPS 950VA Phanteks Evolv Atx Tempered Glass Black + ATX 2... Razer Mamba 2015 Tournament Edition 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QcK Mini Asus Xonar DGX 
  hide details  
Reply
PC
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i7 3770K @4.5Ghz (Multiplier OC) 1... MSI Z77A-GD65 [10.10 BIOS] MSi GTX 980 GAMING + MX4 @1544mhz/1.262v; +450M... Geil Black Dragon 4x4Gb 1866Mhz [XMP] 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 EVO 500Gb [AHCI] Noctua NH-D14 Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 10586.420 (FPP/retail key) BenQ XL2411T [Dual-Link DVI, 144Hz] AUO M24HW01... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Ultimate 2014 [green switches] Enermax Revolution 87+ 750W and APC Back-UPS 950VA Phanteks Evolv Atx Tempered Glass Black + ATX 2... Razer Mamba 2015 Tournament Edition 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QcK Mini Asus Xonar DGX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unkzilla View Post

The aftermarket 980 is ahead of the aftermarket 390x at 1080P & 1440P , performance seems about right on both sides?

look again. The 390X Gaming is ahead of the 980 Strix in all resolutions and the 390 is within 2%.
The GTX 980 is expected to perform better than both those cards.

GTX 980 is ~500$/€
R9 390 is ~ 320$/€
R9 390X is ~400$/€

The 980 is 50%~ more expensive than the R9 390, but only 2% faster. (Powercolor 390 versus 980 Strix)
The 980 is 25% more expensive than the R9 390X, but slower/on par (HIS 390X versus 980 Strix)

If I had bought a 4GB 500$ GTX 980 then I would expect it to outperform a 8GB 390 for 320$/€.

At 4K the Radeons cards are even better. Look closely at the graphs. thumb.gif
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 #16 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by looniam View Post

both sites benched with NV's beta "game ready". tongue.gif
http://www.computerbase.de/2016-02/far-cry-primal-benchmarks/2/
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Far-Cry-Primal-Spiel-56176/Specials/Benchmark-Test-1187476/
unless chrome didn't translate correctly.

Screw GPU. Checkout the CPU Physical Core Scaling!
Quote:
Originally Posted by zealord View Post

look again. The 390X Gaming is ahead of the 980 Strix in all resolutions and the 390 is within 2%.
The GTX 980 is expected to perform better than both those cards.

GTX 980 is ~500$/€
R9 390 is ~ 320$/€
R9 390X is ~400$/€

The 980 is 50%~ more expensive than the R9 390, but only 2% faster. (Powercolor 390 versus 980 Strix)
The 980 is 25% more expensive than the R9 390X, but slower/on par (HIS 390X versus 980 Strix)

At 4K the Radeons cards are even better. Look closely at the graphs. thumb.gif

Paying $500 for a 980 is a waste when the 980TI beats the pants off of it for $150 more.
post #17 of 61
Grats to AMD users, great performance on their side.

But GTX960 user only able to get 24-30fps at 1080P is kind disappointing, kind feel sorry for 7 series users.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 5820K beast mode Asrock X99 Extreme6 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 gaming Vengeance 16G DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
seagate 1T SSHD Windows 7 Pro Acer 32" 4k UHD monitor  
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 5820K beast mode Asrock X99 Extreme6 Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 gaming Vengeance 16G DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
seagate 1T SSHD Windows 7 Pro Acer 32" 4k UHD monitor  
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerPowered View Post

Screw GPU. Checkout the CPU Physical Core Scaling!
Paying $500 for a 980 is a waste when the 980TI beats the pants off of it for $150 more.

I completely agree. Either go 970 or 980 Ti. It is weird that the 980 Ti has a better price/performance ratio than the 980.
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 #19 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerPowered View Post

Screw GPU. Checkout the CPU Physical Core Scaling!

Indeed. Strange is that 6 cores +HT is slower than 6 cores.

While 4 cores + HT is faster than 4 cores
post #20 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by zealord View Post

look again. The 390X Gaming is ahead of the 980 Strix in all resolutions and the 390 is within 2%.
The GTX 980 is expected to perform better than both those cards.

GTX 980 is ~500$/€
R9 390 is ~ 320$/€
R9 390X is ~400$/€

The 980 is 50%~ more expensive than the R9 390, but only 2% faster. (Powercolor 390 versus 980 Strix)
The 980 is 25% more expensive than the R9 390X, but slower/on par (HIS 390X versus 980 Strix)

If I had bought a 4GB 500$ GTX 980 then I would expect it to outperform a 8GB 390 for 320$/€.

At 4K the Radeons cards are even better. Look closely at the graphs. thumb.gif

Haven't had my morning coffee yet, but the Strix is ahead by 1fps average at 1080P and is down by 1FPS average at 1440P vs the 390x.

Agree that the AMD cards are doing well and are better value for money.. .assuming you don't want to pursue overclocking on the Nvidia card biggrin.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PC Gaming
Overclock.net › Forums › Video Games › PC Gaming › [Various] Far Cry: Primal Reviews