[Gamegpu] GTA V PC Benchmark

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Abwx said:
Computerbase.de is a good site generaly but currently they are officialy sponsorised by both Nvidia and Microsoft so i would take their reviews with a grain of salt, as always when one site is financiarly supported by any brand.
Click to expand...

Well, AT itself had an AMD sponsorship awhile ago. I wouldn't imply that would lead to these major sites being biased.

Certainly some sites have shown themselves over many years to be neutral & objective.

Also, reading computerbase.de's benchmark, they got into a lot of details.. this caught my attention:

"Both alternatives are better looking than that of a rock star. AMD Contact Hardening Shadows know it at the end better to please than the percentage-Closer Soft Shadows. Nvidia has currently still struggling with errors (all shadows are missing on the left field), beyond the shadows are very soft. AMD's version is more detailed."

What does that even mean? Thought such an obvious bug would have been noticed.
 
A

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,837
4,790
136
I didnt say that Computerbase.de is baised, rather than their results need to be compared to other sites to check their accuracy, as said they do generaly very good reviews, as for the quote you re pointing it s about this feature :

http://techreport.com/news/28114/gt...ved-stable-supports-contact-hardening-shadows

Edit : not rendering the scene accurately will boost the FPs since the GPU is less loaded, not what i would call a fair comparison, i guess that it can be very usefull to have non functional drivers in some instances...
 
Last edited:
9

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,738
334
126
Abwx said:
Edit : not rendering the scene accurately will boost the FPs since the GPU is less loaded, not what i would call a fair comparison, i guess that it can be very usefull to have non functional drivers in some instances...
Click to expand...

Is any site even doing this? It would be bad practice to benchmark using settings specific to a brand if trying to compare between the two brands.
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
96Firebird said:
Is any site even doing this? It would be bad practice to benchmark using settings specific to a brand if trying to compare between the two brands.
Click to expand...

Computerbase tested AMD & NV shadows on both hardware. NV runs AMD's CHS fine, even better (!) than their shadows.. but AMD crashed running NV shadows. In-game just fails to load.

Guru3d used Rockstar's soft shadows so its neutral.
 
D

desprado

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2013
1,645
0
0
Silverforce11 said:
Computerbase tested AMD & NV shadows on both hardware. NV runs AMD's CHS fine, even better (!) than their shadows.. but AMD crashed running NV shadows. In-game just fails to load.

Guru3d used Rockstar's soft shadows so its neutral.
Click to expand...
Guru3D settings are based on high not Ultra.See there image settings benchmark most of settings are high.

Come on Guru3d u are going benchmark GTX 980, R9 290X and GTX Titan X with high settings?
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
desprado said:
Guru3D settings are based on high not Ultra.See there image settings benchmark most of settings are high.

Come on Guru3d u are going benchmark GTX 980, R9 290X and GTX Titan X with high settings?
Click to expand...

Looking at the maxed results from computerbase.de, not even Titan X is playable at 1080p. o_O

Guru3d turned off a lot of fancy shadow options and disabled motion blur from the looks of it, performance improved massively.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/GTA-5...219948/Tests/GTA-5-PC-Test-Benchmark-1156215/

Also mentions that the shadow options is the major performance loss. They did their bench with NV's PCSS though.
 
Last edited:
D

desprado

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2013
1,645
0
0
Silverforce11 said:
Looking at the maxed results from computerbase.de, not even Titan X is playable at 1080p. o_O

Guru3d turned off a lot of fancy shadow options and disabled motion blur from the looks of it, performance improved massively.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/GTA-5...219948/Tests/GTA-5-PC-Test-Benchmark-1156215/

Also mentions that the shadow options is the major performance loss. They did their bench with NV's PCSS though.
Click to expand...

only advanced video option is causing problem and i have seen people on Ultra settings at 1080p on a single GTX 970 and getting above 60fps with MSAA 2X and TXAA on.
 
DarkKnightDude

DarkKnightDude

Senior member
Mar 10, 2011
981
44
91
I'm not sure if the Vram bar even works properly in game. I've seen some people saying it counts SLI memory and says you need 7 GBs but they're recording and playing just fine at 80-90 FPS without stuttering or issues.
 
P

Pandora's Box

Senior member
Apr 26, 2011
428
151
116
DarkKnightDude said:
I'm not sure if the Vram bar even works properly in game. I've seen some people saying it counts SLI memory and says you need 7 GBs but they're recording and playing just fine at 80-90 FPS without stuttering or issues.
Click to expand...

tells me I need 3.8GB of VRAM. When playing the game uses 5-6GB according to Afterburner.
 
Deders

Deders

Platinum Member
Oct 14, 2012
2,401
1
91
Anyone who wants to use Triple Buffering with Vsync on a Nvidia card, enable them both in the GTAV profile in the control panel and disable Vsync in game.
 
A

Alatar

Member
Aug 3, 2013
167
1
81
Techpowerup: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Rockstar/GTA_V_Performance/3.html

1920_1080.gif


2560_1440.gif


3840_2160.gif
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,961
1,557
136
desprado said:
Guru3D settings are based on high not Ultra.See there image settings benchmark most of settings are high.

Come on Guru3d u are going benchmark GTX 980, R9 290X and GTX Titan X with high settings?
Click to expand...

Maybe there were trying to achieve playable performance instead of a slide show.

Which to me is more important when i'm buying a game.
 
9

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,738
334
126
Looking at TPU's results, the 295x2 was getting CPU-bottlenecked at 900p and 1080p, didn't want to budge over 108FPS.

Higher numbers than others probably because they didn't use any AA.
 
D

desprado

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2013
1,645
0
0
Makaveli said:
Maybe there were trying to achieve playable performance instead of a slide show.

Which to me is more important when i'm buying a game.
Click to expand...
are u serious?

Even my GTX 960 4GB is getting 40 to 50fps on very high to high settings on 1080p and most of the problem lies on Advanced Video option nothing more.
 
H

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,642
12,245
136
desprado said:
are u serious?

Even my GTX 960 4GB is getting 40 to 50fps on very high to high settings on 1080p and most of the problem lies on Advanced Video option nothing more.
Click to expand...

I don't see what the big deal is, it's another data point for comparison. Some people (like myself) don't buy high end much any more so it's nice to see a review with settings where a mid range card gets solid performance, it lets me know what I can expect from my card and still have smooth game play. If it's not important to you, that's fine, but it's not like the results are invalid or something.
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,961
1,557
136
desprado said:
are u serious?

Even my GTX 960 4GB is getting 40 to 50fps on very high to high settings on 1080p and most of the problem lies on Advanced Video option nothing more.
Click to expand...

Yes i'm very serious.

and considering you own a 960 why do you care what numbers the titan X or 290x or 980 are pulling what is the benefit to you?
 
Jacky60

Jacky60

Golden Member
Jan 3, 2010
1,123
0
0
Come on ladies 4k is where it's at these days, ideally at 40 inches ladymen! I'm stuck on FXAA but it does look very good and a consistent never stuttering 60fps/60hz with Vertical sych frame pacing etc, all other settings maxed but I clearly need more oomph somewhere. It's on a WD 1GB HD so I suspect with a couple of 850pros in raid it may speed up. CPU and GPUs rarely get above 50% with all cores similarly loaded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom