Gta V benchmarks surface

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts

The gpu test is done with a i5-4690k at 4.5 ghz (overclocked intel haswell quad core with 4 threads)

Sources

http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=pl&u=http://pclab.pl/art57777-15.html

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=nl&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hardwareluxx.de%2Findex.php%2Fartikel%2Fsoftware%2Fspiele%2F34929-pc-version-von-gta-v-angespielt-inklusive-benchmarks.html%3Fstart%3D2

Avatar image for blangenakker
blangenakker

3240

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 blangenakker
Member since 2006 • 3240 Posts

I would definetly need to turn down the usual graphics settings for my 650 Ti Boost.

Avatar image for Coseniath
Coseniath

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Coseniath
Member since 2004 • 3183 Posts

Lol, @commander, refresh your results.

This is the first time I see a site adding more results while the test was going on I guess..

It seems that they posted more results :O.

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts

@Coseniath: hehe, thanks man, i updated them

Seems like I'm going for that fxaa and 1000 p lol, maybe lower the view distance as well a bit.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

Damn. This game do need the advantage that OC does. From stock to 4.5 for i5 Ivy Bridge (3570K) the fps close to 10fps... I'm happy that they included results for the GTX 680 in the GPU test.

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#6 Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

There is a bench mark tool built into the game and on MAX settings there are spots at 30 FPS. I did some tweaking and a lot of settings 1 notch below max... The same spots that were 30 are now 55+. I would say the avg is 65 FPS. This is with a GTX 970 with top boost of 1430 MHz and 7200 MHz memory, I7 3770k at 4.2 GHz, 850 pro SSD's and 16GB 1866 MHz memory.

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#7 commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts
@horgen said:

Damn. This game do need the advantage that OC does. From stock to 4.5 for i5 Ivy Bridge (3570K) the fps close to 10fps... I'm happy that they included results for the GTX 680 in the GPU test.

I'm selling my pc, going to get some more oomph for this game, don't feel like lowering the settings. I was due for an upgrade anyway.

Avatar image for ShadowDeathX
ShadowDeathX

11698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#8 ShadowDeathX
Member since 2006 • 11698 Posts

This game has a bottleneck somewhere, within the engine or API.

My CPU usage never comes close to maxing out, even on the first two cores. My GPU usage doesn't come close to maxing out either. And my video RAM is not maxed out either.

I get around 85 - 120 fps but since the game doesn't use the hardware available to it's potential, I should theoretically be getting better performance.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

@commander: I see no point in selling mine. By the time I get to play this game, a new generation of cards have been released.

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#10 commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts

@ShadowDeathX said:

This game has a bottleneck somewhere, within the engine or API.

My CPU usage never comes close to maxing out, even on the first two cores. My GPU usage doesn't come close to maxing out either. And my video RAM is not maxed out either.

I get around 85 - 120 fps but since the game doesn't use the hardware available to it's potential, I should theoretically be getting better performance.

what system do you have?

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

@commander: 3570k at 4.5, gtx 680 with good OC possibility if needed. 16GB ram

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#12 commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts

@horgen said:

@commander: 3570k at 4.5, gtx 680 with good OC possibility if needed. 16GB ram

you'll probably run into a vram bottleneck with that gtx 680

Avatar image for ShadowDeathX
ShadowDeathX

11698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#13 ShadowDeathX
Member since 2006 • 11698 Posts

.

Avatar image for ShadowDeathX
ShadowDeathX

11698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 ShadowDeathX
Member since 2006 • 11698 Posts

@commander said:

@ShadowDeathX said:

This game has a bottleneck somewhere, within the engine or API.

My CPU usage never comes close to maxing out, even on the first two cores. My GPU usage doesn't come close to maxing out either. And my video RAM is not maxed out either.

I get around 85 - 120 fps but since the game doesn't use the hardware available to it's potential, I should theoretically be getting better performance.

what system do you have?

  • i7 3930k at 4.5 Ghz
  • 3 HD7970s in Trifire
  • 32GB DDR3 RAM

1440p / 120fps

Avatar image for commander
commander

16217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By commander
Member since 2010 • 16217 Posts

@ShadowDeathX: note that this on a i5-5960X (8 core intel) overclocked to 4.40 ghz

So a lot of frames are defenitely the courtesy of that top end cpu.

Avatar image for Coseniath
Coseniath

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 Coseniath
Member since 2004 • 3183 Posts

@ShadowDeathX: You forgot one very popular lately graph:

Radeon R9 290X 8GB - In dark blue the VRAM measured in AfterBurner - In light blue what the game indicates as VRAM usage with our settings. So overall in the city the VRAM requirement can run higher than prognosed.

Also notice that:

A note - since we measure in the online city and not the internal benchmark, you will spawn at random places with random weather and differences in day an night. This will cause an adverse offset in frame-rate. So please use these numbers as indicative at best. There can be weird variations in-between the performance of graphics card just because at one point it rains, the the next card had say dry sunny weather. This WILL impact the FPS. So keep a 15% margin at hand and please again, consider these indicative results.

Due to the note above, we might re-do the entire session with the internal benchmark, but there are some bugs in this initial release that will need to be squashed first and we do think that testing in the actual city running and shooting around, is more representative of the real performance.

This review is work in progress, over the next few days we'll be adding Crossfire/SLI Frametime recordings and some more mixed quality mode results as well.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#17 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127503 Posts

@ShadowDeathX: Why does your graph for 2560*1440 show that GTX 680 performs better (just one frame) than GTX 770?

@commander said:

@horgen said:

@commander: 3570k at 4.5, gtx 680 with good OC possibility if needed. 16GB ram

you'll probably run into a vram bottleneck with that gtx 680

And lack of power. I don't game at 1080, I game at 3440*1440...

Avatar image for ShadowDeathX
ShadowDeathX

11698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#18 ShadowDeathX
Member since 2006 • 11698 Posts

@horgen: Margin of Error.

The two cards aren't that different anyways.

Avatar image for Bikouchu35
Bikouchu35

8344

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By Bikouchu35
Member since 2009 • 8344 Posts

Heading to the crapstop to pick up my copy!

Avatar image for deathlordcrime
DeathLordCrime

893

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#20 DeathLordCrime
Member since 2014 • 893 Posts

Runs pretty well from what I heard

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#22 Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

Multiplayer FPS is horrendous. Constant drops. I can tell so easy when a game doesn't run smooth.

Single player is pretty much rock solid and smooth.

Might be from the latency causing it.

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#23 Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

Well, my MP frame rate is now buttery smooth. Did some more tweaking.

Here are the settings if anyone wants to know.

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

@Chatch09:

I have no idea why my FPS drops in MP. MP looks worse then SP... To me at least. But now I got a good setting that works for both, since I can't have 2 separate settings.

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

@Chatch09:

Well once I hit 4.3 GHz I have to jump up to 1.2 volts, from 1.138 for 4.2 GHz. 4.4 GHz isn't even worth trying to obtain since the voltage increase is more then I would want to run 24/7.

970 really only has 3.5 GB of full speed memory. So that buffer I gave it, gives it enough room to breath... when it needs to. I could maybe disable aero and squeeze a few more FPS. But at the settings I have it out now, there isn't to big of a difference to justify worrying about it.

Avatar image for sailor232
sailor232

6880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#29 sailor232
Member since 2003 • 6880 Posts

Anyone know what 2 6950's 2g models will do with this game? CPU is 3570k overclocked.

Avatar image for alucrd2009
Alucrd2009

787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#30 Alucrd2009
Member since 2007 • 787 Posts

I dont know i trust this better.

Avatar image for kraken2109
kraken2109

13271

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 kraken2109
Member since 2009 • 13271 Posts

Looks like it's time for me to get a new CPU.

Avatar image for alucrd2009
Alucrd2009

787

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#32 Alucrd2009
Member since 2007 • 787 Posts

@kraken2109: I m really happy that my 8350 is holding 60 FPS , and it would do more when DX 12 ! but still waiting for ZEN prject from AMD , I cant help it I love Amd stuff ^^ .

Avatar image for Coseniath
Coseniath

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By Coseniath
Member since 2004 • 3183 Posts
@Jawad2007 said:

@kraken2109: I m really happy that my 8350 is holding 60 FPS , and it would do more when DX 12 ! but still waiting for ZEN prject from AMD , I cant help it I love Amd stuff ^^ .

Although I highly believe that this is a professional type CPU (like Xeon or Itanium), this is a great step from the previous designs:

AMD x86 16-core Zen APU detailed

Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
Gaming-Planet

21064

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#34  Edited By Gaming-Planet
Member since 2008 • 21064 Posts

I don't get how a 680 and a 960 perform about the same. It must not be utilizing the entire gpu unless the vram is the bottleneck.

Does this game use a lot of damn memory or something?

Avatar image for PcGamingRig
PcGamingRig

7386

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 PcGamingRig
Member since 2009 • 7386 Posts

Nice, I was thinking about upgrading to a GTX 970 OC so it looks fairly promising.

Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#36 Lach0121
Member since 2007 • 11783 Posts

Its got decent performance, yet while driving it seems to dip with apparently little reason to do so.

I am hoping for patches, and newer drivers to get better performance. So in the coming months I expect to see (if even just a little) performance increase just from that department.

Then we have the option to overclock our rigs. (which we will do right after we make sure we do a thorough cleaning of our dust filters, and fans in our rigs) As well as DX12 with the new Windows. So this performance should only go up from here, unless they release a game breaking patch...