Far Cry 3 GPU and CPU benchmarks [PCGH.de]

[ICDP]

I am running everything on ultra settings at 2560x1600, with 2X MSAA, HDAO.

I get an average of almost 40 FPS, dropping to low 30s in heavy combat. I find it very playable and get no stutters that I can see.

HD 7970 at 1150/1600.
i7 2600K @ 4.7GHz
12.11 B11 and 12.11 CAP 2

 

[moonbogg]

Perhaps. Performance just seems inconsistent with Far Cry 3. I've seen other people with 670's getting 1/2 the performance i am seeing.

CPU is a big factor as well. FC3 wants a quad core. Dual core CPU's seem to bottleneck graphic performance for people with good GPU's.

Also, the 1.02 patch slightly boosted my performance when 4X MSAA is enabled.

Performance isn't different, its people's setups, drivers, settings and testing methodology that is different. Its the same game for everyone. Those custom SLI bits make an absolutely gigantic difference for performance in SLI. This is not something SLI users should overlook.

 

[Grooveriding]

GAMEGPU.RU has retested using the latest 1.02 Far Cry 3 patch and the new drivers from AMD & Nvidia. They also have tested different AO / MSAA settings and most importantly have included some screenshots comparing Ambient Occlusion quality on both vendor's cards.

http://translate.google.ca/translat...a=X&ei=Eqy_UNeOJeWg2AXZs4DQBA&ved=0CDUQ7gEwAA

Here are the ones I care about using 4xMSAA and the highest quality HDAO setting.

Here is a comparison of the HDAO ambient occlusion setting on nvidia hardware vs AMD hardware. Gamegpu found HDAO works better on AMD hardware and presented higher IQ. This also helps to show the issue I found with HDAO on my setup with it over shadowing the image.

If you look at the bush on the far left of the image you can see it looks almost blacked out on nvidia vs the softer effect seen on AMD. It helps to see it across the whole image from both vendors. Not sure why, but with nvidia it makes everything really dark. In certain situations you can really notice it characters in the game.

 

[Silverforce11]

I can't tell the difference in those images.. really besides NV shadows being more "dark".. but is that worst?

 

[wand3r3r]

What are the best settings to compromise on to maintain playable FPS on the 670/680/7950/7970 levels? What will offer the best picture, while reducing something intensive...

(1920x1200 resolution)

 

[cmdrdredd]

In that comparison shot, the Nvidia screenshot is taken when standing in a different position. It's close but if you look closely the player is closer to the tree. Does this have an effect on the ambient lighting? I also notice the image is overall a bit lighter on the AMD screenshot by default. Look at the character's hand and the camo paint. The Nvidia shot clearly shows a different flesh tone. More orange or red.

There's probably more differences than simply the HDAO implementation.

 

[homercles337]

Here is a comparison of the HDAO ambient occlusion setting on nvidia hardware vs AMD hardware. Gamegpu found HDAO works better on AMD hardware and presented higher IQ. This also helps to show the issue I found with HDAO on my setup with it over shadowing the image.

WRT, your concern about "darker" or "more shadowing," it looks like a difference in gamma correction to me. I bet that the two are using different exponents on their gamma.

 

[Grooveriding]

WRT, your concern about "darker" or "more shadowing," it looks like a difference in gamma correction to me. I bet that the two are using different exponents on their gamma.

It's definitely not gamma settings as that would have an affect on colouring in the images. The colour of objects are identical between the two. The difference is in the way ambient occlusion is being applied.

As the review said the AMD cards are giving better image quality here and softer shadowing.

 

[cmdrdredd]

It's definitely not gamma settings as that would have an affect on colouring in the images. The colour of objects are identical between the two. The difference is in the way ambient occlusion is being applied.

As the review said the AMD cards are giving better image quality here and softer shadowing.

The color is NOT identical. Look at the flesh tone, the camo, the "shed". The Nvidia shot is showing a more orangish or redish tone. There is something else at work for sure.

Those screenshots are unreliable due to that.

 

[Grooveriding]

The color is NOT identical. Look at the flesh tone, the camo, the "shed". The Nvidia shot is showing a more orangish or redish tone. There is something else at work for sure.

Those screenshots are unreliable due to that.

I don't see that at all. Where the shed looks darker is where the shadow being cast by the tree is heavier.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I don't see that at all. Where the shed looks darker is where the shadow being cast by the tree is heavier.

Then your monitor is not rendering colors correctly. It's obvious...painfully so. I'm not the only one who noticed it either. homercles also mentioned the difference in color.

The hand on the AMD card is more natural looking to me while the Nvidia screenshot shows more orange. Further the wood panels clearly have something written on them in white. It's completely obscured by a white light on that part of the image in the AMD sccreenshot. I'm not going to call it washed out yet, but that is how it would look. The Nvidia shot shows the text there, unreadable but visible.

How you can ignore that is beyond me.

 

[Grooveriding]

Then your monitor is not rendering colors correctly. It's obvious...painfully so. I'm not the only one who noticed it either. homercles also mentioned the difference in color.

The hand on the AMD card is more natural looking to me while the Nvidia screenshot shows more orange. Further the wood panels clearly have something written on them in white. It's completely obscured by a white light on that part of the image in the AMD sccreenshot. I'm not going to call it washed out yet, but that is how it would look. The Nvidia shot shows the text there, unreadable but visible.

How you can ignore that is beyond me.

You're seeing exactly what the image is showing; softer shadowing in the AMD picture vs the nvidia picture.

That bush on the far left in the nvidia picture is almost completely black. Please, that has nothing to do with 'gamma'.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You're seeing exactly what the image is showing; softer shadowing in the AMD picture vs the nvidia picture.

That bush on the far left in the nvidia picture is almost completely black. Please, that has nothing to do with 'gamma'.

You're ignoring what I'm saying. The colors are not identical. That has nothing to do with HDAO. Look at the other shots from that site. They all show Nvidia with a reddish color tone. That could be from many things and could most definitely affect the way the shadows look.

Until this is explained, I can't sit here and claim one is proper and the other is not. For all I know the washed out look of the AMD shot could be incorrect. Especially if you consider that the wood panel has some writing on it that you almost can't see in the AMD screenshot but it clearly visible on Nvidia. There is also a stone like archway on top of the shed toward the top right of the shot. On the AMD side it's clearly lacking some details and some of the cracks aren't as visible.

So claiming one is worse looking without taking into account these details is a little unfair to be sure. It's obvious to me that there's more there than simply darker shadows.

 

[Deders]

To me the difference in colour looks like it's down to the dynamic weather, that being said the skin and bark tone on the nvidia picture is more familiar to me then on the AMD pic

 

[Makaveli]

You're ignoring what I'm saying. The colors are not identical. That has nothing to do with HDAO. Look at the other shots from that site. They all show Nvidia with a reddish color tone. That could be from many things and could most definitely affect the way the shadows look.

Until this is explained, I can't sit here and claim one is proper and the other is not. For all I know the washed out look of the AMD shot could be incorrect. Especially if you consider that the wood panel has some writing on it that you almost can't see in the AMD screenshot but it clearly visible on Nvidia. There is also a stone like archway on top of the shed toward the top right of the shot. On the AMD side it's clearly lacking some details and some of the cracks aren't as visible.

So claiming one is worse looking without taking into account these details is a little unfair to be sure.

I can see this difference on my screen also.

On a calibrated IPS monitor.

 

[Rhezuss]

Ok, with my new upgrades (sig) I get pretty nice FPS with these options:

- 1920x1080 w/ Vsync at 1 frame
- GPU buffer 1
- DX11
- MSAA OFF
- Alpha to coverage STANDARD
- SSAO method HDAO
- FoV 90

- Textures, Shadows, Ambient lighting, Terrain, Water and Environment HIGH
- Post FX, Geometry and Vegetation VERY HIGH

Mostly pleased with these settings.

EDIT: Dunno if it's an illusion but having Uplay run in Offline mode makes FC3 run even smoother...maybe it's a mirage

 

[cmdrdredd]

To me the difference in colour looks like it's down to the dynamic weather, that being said the skin and bark tone on the nvidia picture is more familiar to me then on the AMD pic

That is really what could potentially make these comparisons worthless. If there is one detail of the lighting or weather out of sync with the other shot it could throw off the whole comparison.

I suppose it's up to your interpretation as to what appears correct or out of place. Now if the art director from the dev team came in and says "this shot appears to show card A oversaturating color X." then we can draw logical conclusions. Until then, I cannot say with certanty that one is too dark when the other could easily be too light.

 

[Grooveriding]

You're ignoring what I'm saying. The colors are not identical. That has nothing to do with HDAO. Look at the other shots from that site. They all show Nvidia with a reddish color tone. That could be from many things and could most definitely affect the way the shadows look.

Until this is explained, I can't sit here and claim one is proper and the other is not. For all I know the washed out look of the AMD shot could be incorrect. Especially if you consider that the wood panel has some writing on it that you almost can't see in the AMD screenshot but it clearly visible on Nvidia. There is also a stone like archway on top of the shed toward the top right of the shot. On the AMD side it's clearly lacking some details and some of the cracks aren't as visible.

So claiming one is worse looking without taking into account these details is a little unfair to be sure. It's obvious to me that there's more there than simply darker shadows.

Didn't want to deviate the thread, but I have a 3007wfp-hc with a profile set by a Spyder. I see the differences you're referring to, but as I said, the shadowing is much heavier and overdone in the nvidia shot using HDAO. That is quite clear. The gamma settings are not going to affect areas that heavily without doing the same to the entire image.

This is an issue I posted about before this review from just my own experience with the game. There are areas where the AO 'smears' and goes out of whack.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Didn't want to deviate the thread, but I have a 3007wfp-hc with a profile set by a Spyder. I see the differences you're referring to, but as I said, the shadowing is much heavier and overdone in the nvidia shot using HDAO. That is quite clear. The gamma settings are not going to affect areas that heavily without doing the same to the entire image.

This is an issue I posted about before this review from just my own experience with the game. There are areas where the AO 'smears' and goes out of whack.

I see that and do understand, but there are other areas where the image appears better and more detailed.

So I have a hard time flatly claiming X hardware looks better.

Also do any of the ambient occlusion settings through either inspector or the control panel make any difference to the image?

 

[lavaheadache]

I'm a dope.... Here I was complaining earlier in this thread how I thought the graphics were just meh...

Turns out I played for 2 hours without realizing that "high" wasn't the highest settings. Also turns out that the graphics are pretty darned good.

You guys should check out what "high" looks like, then come back and make fun of me for being stoooooopid,

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'm a dope.... Here I was complaning earlier in this thread how I thought the graphics were just meh...

Turns out I played for 2 hours without realizing that "high" wasn't the highest settings. Also turns out that the graphics are pretty darned good.

You guys should check out what "high" looks like, then come back and make fun of me for being stoooooopid,

It can happen. In many games you have high, medium, and low. A few titles have ultra and it could be missed. I've done it.

 

[Lepton87]

Finally 6990 performs as it should, outperforming everything except 690 at my resolution. Let's hope the game scales beyond 2 GPUs. The scaling in 6 series is better then it should theoretically be. 6990 is averaging over 2x the frames rates of 6970 even though it has lower clocks. I just hope the scaling holds for 4 gpus, over 90 fps would be sweet Maybe they tested 6990 at 880MHz

 

[lavaheadache]

Finally? Didn't the game come out just over 24 hours ago?

 

[Rhezuss]

After playing around the settings and option, I found the perfect setup, no stuttering and smoth FPS!

- Vsync 1 frame
- GPU Buffer 1
- DX11
- MSAA off
- Alpha to coverage STANDARD
- SSAO method HDAO
- FoV 90

- Textures, Ambient lighting, Shadows, Vegetation, Terrain, Water and Environment HIGH
- Post FX and Geometry ULTRA

With my former settings the game was looking ok, not great. But now WOW, dunno why but the Ultra settings really make this game shine! Awesome stuff!

EDIT: Do you guys have some heavy glare/light on sand/beach environment? I'm having this single issue on any kind of setting combination...not gamebreaking but a bit too much...

 

[DiogoDX]

GAMEGPU.RU has retested using the latest 1.02 Far Cry 3 patch and the new drivers from AMD & Nvidia. They also have tested different AO / MSAA settings and most importantly have included some screenshots comparing Ambient Occlusion quality on both vendor's cards.

http://translate.google.ca/translat...a=X&ei=Eqy_UNeOJeWg2AXZs4DQBA&ved=0CDUQ7gEwAA

Here are the ones I care about using 4xMSAA and the highest quality HDAO setting.

http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Far%20Cry%203%20v.%201.0.2/fc3%201920%20hd%204x.png[/IMG

[IMG]http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Far%20Cry%203%20v.%201.0.2/fc3%202560%20hd%204x.png[/IMG



Here is a comparison of the HDAO ambient occlusion setting on nvidia hardware vs AMD hardware. Gamegpu found HDAO works better on AMD hardware and presented higher IQ. This also helps to show the issue I found with HDAO on my setup with it over shadowing the image.

[IMG]http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Far%20Cry%203%20v.%201.0.2/foto/farcry3_hdao.jpg[/IMG


If you look at the bush on the far left of the image you can see it looks almost blacked out on nvidia vs the softer effect seen on AMD. It helps to see it across the whole image from both vendors. Not sure why, but with nvidia it makes everything really dark. In certain situations you can really notice it characters in the game.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately the pictures have a different contrast and colors that make it difficult to compare. But you can see the bush in the background with excessive shadows and this should not happen with HDAO. The problem does not occur with HBAO.