• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

computerbasePvZ: Garden Warfare 2 Benchmarks

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Firebird96 said:
First link talks about Frostbite, the engine that powers the game.
And the minor issue of some bait about Unreal engine 4, at completely unrelated engine that has literally nothing to do with the thread, no discussion of the benchmarks, no comment about the endine and nothing that contributes to thread at all. As if any of us actually care whether threads are on topic.
Firebird96 said:
The second link goes to another review for the game that this thread is about.
Along with an unprovoked callout against a member for posting benchmarks.
Firebird96 said:
The third link talks about the review from the second link.
The third post, in fact, has nothing whatsoever to do with game or benchmarks. It's about patronizingly mocking Fury X buyers and literally nothing else.

Silverforce's posts are in response to the first post he linked which talks about Frostbite being AMD-biased and why he believes that this is a common trend among console ports. A completely valid response to good_fella's bait.

Then you come along and start a personal argument, further derailing the thread, making you a hypocrite and exposing the insincerity of your concern about whether the posts are on topic.

Here's an on topic thought - this game looks and runs great and everyone should want more games like this. Who cares if the Fury X is ahead by 5% when you're both getting a great experience?
 
Last edited:
They only like site like Gamegpu, Sweatoverclockers and Techspot which are using GTX 980 Ti reference stock.
 
Last edited:
I haven't made anything up. Please show me where I have?

In my experience, I've been telling the truth and people responding have been making things up because they don't like the truth.

Either way, this is derailing the thread.
 
I haven't made anything up. Please show me where I have?

In my experience, I've been telling the truth and people responding have been making things up because they don't like the truth.

Either way, this is derailing the thread.
You are not telling and ,however, you are just justifying and telling just to wait for AMD and DX12 same like the guy i posted the video.

Just read the comments
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18712893

Second last and last page.

Just like you are doing here.
 
Here Gears of war ,
Recommended for 4K
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 - version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 390X
Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
DirectX 12

Why R9 390X? why not fury X? perhaps gears of war is like Aots? in that case , Fury X would be much faster than GTX 980Ti.
 
IS this a joke.

So mean in DX12 for GTX 970> R9 290X?

why do not post full specs?

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/gears-war-ultimate-edition-pc-specs-revealed-windows-10-514560'

Really?!!! Are you kidding me ? did you see my post ? I wrote "Recommended for 4K"
here I wrote :
Recommended for 4K
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 - version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 390X
Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
DirectX 12

why should I post full spec? your post has nothing to do with my post.i said why 390X? R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980Ti.next time please read carefully.
 
Last edited:
Really?!!! Are you kidding me ? did you see my post ? I wrote "Recommended for 4K"
here I wrote :


why should I post full spec? your post has nothing to do with my post.i said why 390X? R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980Ti.next time please read carefully.

Do you know that R9 290X is a rebrand of R9 390X?
 
Man, I don't like the trend. Maxwell is going to continue to tank going forward. Those of you who were able to grab a R9 290 (non-reference) for ~$200 got a great deal. As consoles developers learn to extract more power from it, I expect the GCN cards to pull away.
 
Man, I don't like the trend. Maxwell is going to continue to tank going forward. Those of you who were able to grab a R9 290 (non-reference) for ~$200 got a great deal. As consoles developers learn to extract more power from it, I expect the GCN cards to pull away.

Did you even see the benchmarks that i posted of this game.

Pchardware.de has done a good benchmark of this game.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Plant...5633/Specials/Technik-Test-Benchmark-1187424/
 
Really?!!! Are you kidding me ? did you see my post ? I wrote "Recommended for 4K"
here I wrote :


why should I post full spec? your post has nothing to do with my post.i said why 390X? R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980Ti.next time please read carefully.

6GB VRAM requirement under 4K. I doubt a R9 390x will match a GTX 980 Ti but the 8GB VRAM might help it.
 
Man, I don't like the trend. Maxwell is going to continue to tank going forward. Those of you who were able to grab a R9 290 (non-reference) for ~$200 got a great deal. As consoles developers learn to extract more power from it, I expect the GCN cards to pull away.

That's what I'm also seeing.
 
Do you know that R9 290X is a rebrand of R9 390X?

you didn't answer my question:
why this ?
Recommended for 4K
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 - version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 390X
Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
DirectX 12

why not this ?
Recommended for 4K
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 - version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon Fury X
Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
DirectX 12

like i said R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980TI.The recommended speccs show 980 Ti and 390X on the same "level".if this is true then Fury X is faster than GTX 980Ti.this is shocked.
 
you didn't answer my question:
why this ?


why not this ?


like i said R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980TI.The recommended speccs show 980 Ti and 390X on the same "level".if this is true then Fury X is faster than GTX 980Ti.this is shocked.

Because of this Recommended for 4K
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 - version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon Fury X
Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
DirectX 12
 
you didn't answer my question:
why this ?


why not this ?


like i said R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980TI.The recommended speccs show 980 Ti and 390X on the same "level".if this is true then Fury X is faster than GTX 980Ti.this is shocked.

It is because Fury X is only 4GB. Just read it.
 
Yes but some people do not like GTX 980 Ti custom model benchmarks. They like to compare to it with reference GTX 980 Ti which at clocked speed of 1202mhz in games.

The GTX 980 TI is the best card on the planet right now. Don't worry. It's still safe, for now.... (Disclaimer: until Pascal launches; expect Maxwell take a nose dive soon after).

Honestly, if it wasn't for the measley 4GB on the Fury X, it would actually be a pretty good buy for multi-GPU setups.
 
you didn't answer my question:
why this ?


why not this ?


like i said R9 390X is not rival of GTX 980TI.The recommended speccs show 980 Ti and 390X on the same "level".if this is true then Fury X is faster than GTX 980Ti.this is shocked.

Why an i5@3.5 for 1080 but an i7@4 for 4k when everybody knows that 4k will run slower than 1080 so you won't need a faster CPU?
Cause the devs called technical support and that's what they told them.
 
Back
Top