• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

[guru3d] Total War: Warhammer DX12 benched

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,610
315
126
Wow, a 390 beating a 980 at 1080p! That would be crazy if in say 2017 the 390 is solidly a better card than the GTX 980.
 

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,184
1,492
136
Going forward with more DX12 games, it'll probably be, not to mention 290x/390x. Hawaii is one legendary GPU in longevity, probably the next Tahiti.


The 960 shows in this game how underpowered it is, it's not even funny. The 1080 doesn't look so impressive here, although it could gain from overclocking.
 

MajinCry

Platinum Member
Jul 28, 2015
2,488
557
136
I vaguely remember looking at performance graphs for Rome 2, and not even the super clocked i7s were able to break past ~45fps with max details. 'Twas even worse with Attila?

I want to see how this game fairs with a Phenom II, for obvious reasons. If it scales well on older hardware, we'll be seeing some pretty dank mods.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,424
5,497
126
maybe i should pick up another 290 now that people seem to be dumping them :hmm:

CF work in this?
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
744
126
Wow, a 390 beating a 980 at 1080p! That would be crazy if in say 2017 the 390 is solidly a better card than the GTX 980.
But "Most gamers upgrade their GPU after 1-2 years," it's perfectly normal for a $549 980 to start losing to a $329 R9 390 and for a 2013 $699 780Ti to not be supported in DX12 games. /s "Once we cross-check that with the info listed below, you'll notice that AMD GCN 1.0 and Kepler GPUs only have support for DX feature level 11_1 where we need feature level 12_0 supported as minimum. It's a bit tricky, but the tables below show it precisely. Hence such cards do not work with this test."

What's there to worry about? The 780Ti/980 owner just sells those gets a 1070/1080. :thumbsup:

BTW, did you see R9 380/380X beating GTX960 2GB by 2.08/2.28X?

At 1440p, the 970 is only 16% faster than the 380X.

The 960 shows in this game how underpowered it is, it's not even funny.
I know right. 1.5 years later and it's toast, esp. the 2GB version. If more and more games start using DX12, RX 480 could be a solid mainstream card as the foundation for DX12 is already there in its architecture for budget/mainstream gamers ready to dump their 750/750Ti/950/960 2GB.

maybe i should pick up another 290 now that people seem to be dumping them :hmm:

CF work in this?
I would hold off until some reviews shows CF working properly under DX12.

"In the end, we still have to remember that the drivers have not been finalized for the DX12 version of this game so we can use this to see how everything is performing comparatively at the current time. Something of note is that multi-GPU does not appear to be functioning at the moment, at least on AMD side since neither the R9 295×2 or Fury X + Nano configurations would crash as soon as the game loaded."

Not for this game, but I think overall for many other games, I'd rather pick $400 AIB 1070 OC over 2x R9 290 OC.
 
Last edited:

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,355
641
121
maybe i should pick up another 290 now that people seem to be dumping them :hmm:

CF work in this?
If you get them super cheap ya.
It's probably better to see if you can sell your 290 for $200 instead.
 

crisium

Platinum Member
Aug 19, 2001
2,632
593
136
I wonder why the 1070 doesn't stand above the Titan X here. I thought DX12 was better for Pascal than Maxwell.
 

boozzer

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2012
1,549
17
81
wow, almost every gpu is playable, except the obvious trash at the bottom. I bet even the trash can break 30 fps if some settings are lowered.
 

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
RX 480 could be a solid mainstream card as the foundation for DX12 is already there in its architecture for budget/mainstream gamers ready to dump their 750/750Ti/950/960 2GB.
It's tough though, how does a consumer buy something for possible future performance?

Case in point, when the Fury X and GTX 980 Ti launched around the same time the 980 Ti was a no brainer for me. The Ti was just simply leading the Fury X in almost everything at 1440p. My first thought when I saw these graphs was that these are the results AMD needed when Fury X launched.

After looking at these results I was curious to see what a Fury X goes for these days, and it looks like they're still $620+ at newegg. While the Fury X might have been a worthwhile gamble at launch, now that the GTX 1080 is (sort of) available it's not really worth the asking price.

AMD makes good cards, but they need to either figure out how to get better gains in current tech while building for the future, or they need to somehow reliably quantify what gains we'll see in the future. I'm not sure how they could do either of these, but if they keep building cards that take two years to see their potential they will keep losing to NVIDIA who makes cards that are fast now.
 

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,184
1,492
136
I wonder why the 1070 doesn't stand above the Titan X here. I thought DX12 was better for Pascal than Maxwell.
From what we've seen so far, consumer Pascal just looks like a Maxwell shrink with a new feature here and there, relying on clockspeed to drive performance up. So, Maxwell's weakesses that have appeared lately will also probably haunt Pascal throughout its life. As more DX12 games come out, we'll see if this is the case. Man, 20nm failing as it did sure screwed up the game for both sides of the fence.

Pro/HPC GP100 is probably another thing altogether considering its SMs are different and GCN-like in some ways, but we probably won't see that in a Geforce version not anytime soon, and considering the "GP102 = 1.5x GP104" rumors like GM200 was to GM204, we probably never will.


Volta should be a brand new architecture with a different set of strengths and weaknesses, but that's for 2018. Hell, Pascal appeared out of nowhere in roadmaps when 20nm failed, if the foundries didn't hit a wall these past few years we would've had Volta now, not Pascal (Paxwell?)



GTX 960 is GM206, x06 chips used to be the GT 440 tier of cards before nV moved the midrange x04 chips to the high end price tag and that's clearly showing here.
 
Last edited:

Piroko

Senior member
Jan 10, 2013
905
79
91
Small disclaimer from guru3d:
I wanted to write a note in this article about using MLAA. MLAA is an acronym for MorphoLogical Anti-Aliasing. MLAA is a shape-based anti-aliasing method that uses post processing filters to reduce aliasing. Like the SSAO, MLAA can be hand-coded in a 3D app or added in graphics drivers. The Benchmark version of the game was provided to us by AMD, the game is an Gaming Evolved title. I found it to be surprising that in the Anti-aliasing options of the benchmark, MSAA is nowhere to be found (disabled). Either you disable AA or use MLAA, these are the only options. MLAA for AMD is what if FXAA for Nvidia. MLAA is way more optimized for AMD opposed to Nvidia and that works out really well for them, especially for the mainstream cards. You could state that this is a somewhat 'favored' option that the game-title is forcing us to use. So again, AMD will yield better results from MLAA but in retrospect, over the years Nvidia cold have optimized this technology a bit more in their advantage.
Still, that might be the first TW since Shogun 2 that runs well enough on normal hardware.
 

swilli89

Golden Member
Mar 23, 2010
1,538
1,143
136
First of all, what a piece of garbage the gtx960 is. Still shaking my head to all the times people defended that choice over a r9 380. Like seriously? Kepler plummeting to its death 2 years after its release and people are shocked Maxwell cards starting to do the same?

Second, yet another DX12 title that shows AMD winning. As others said above, Pascal definitely starting to look like merely a shrunken Pascal "Paxwell" and nVidia is stuck on this for the next two years apparently. I have a feeling Vega and Polaris are going to do very, very well especially in modern DX 12 games like Battlefield 1, Forza 6, Arma 3, Watch Dogs 2, Star Citizen, and Deus Ex among others.
 

MajinCry

Platinum Member
Jul 28, 2015
2,488
557
136
The difference between post-processing AA methods, except for that convoluted depthbuffer MSAA implementation, is pretty much negligible.

FXAA vs SMAA vs MLAA only matters when you're on low end hardware; my 6670 preferred MLAA or FXAA over SMAA, but my 7850 couldn't give a rats ass whether they're on or off, or even used together.

Though, FXAA is developed by NVidia. And if we're talking Gameworks titles, you can bet your arse that NVidia's just done it badly. Boris Vorontsov was mighty disappointed when he looked at the Gameworks HBAO code after reading the tech papers. Said that it had potential, but the implementation was just pathetic.
 

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,282
401
126
Still, that might be the first TW since Shogun 2 that runs well enough on normal hardware.
Don't bet on it,this is the benchmark fairy tail(Gpu load only) ,the game will still run all it's logic/AI/whatever on a single core,sure zooming around the map will be faster with Dx12 but that's not what makes this game.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,117
1,905
126
Someone help me out here. Are these new drivers or something? Because I remember seeing this game run like crap on everything other than a 1080. If you OC that 980ti it will be at the top of the charts with the 1080. I got your sour grapes right here.
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,610
315
126
It's tough though, how does a consumer buy something for possible future performance?
All the evidence was there I think.

I mean, when you looked at the 2013 parts on paper (bus sizes, compute capacity, etc.) AMD hardware looked like a clear winner. Plus we all knew the other mitigating factors- namely that the consoles were based on GCN. The only evidence we had that Kepler was better than Hawaii was the benchmarks of games we could already buy, anyone who tried to read the tea leaves could see past that.

That is why so many people are focused on Pascal not having async. It shows a clear weakness in Nvidia's architecture that makes it seem obvious that whatever card AMD rolls out to match the 1080 this year will for sure be beating that 1080 in three years if not within the first year. But if you are buying a card today that doesn't help you.

It comes down to the fact that many people have different priorities. Some people want to play games the day they come out, and they expect to upgrade hardware every two years. For them AMD gives them no benefits, and rightfully so.
 

Mercennarius

Senior member
Oct 28, 2015
466
84
46
Someone help me out here. Are these new drivers or something? Because I remember seeing this game run like crap on everything other than a 1080. If you OC that 980ti it will be at the top of the charts with the 1080. I got your sour grapes right here.
If I overclock my 390X i'll be right there with the 980ti in this chart...talk about bang for the buck and GPU longevity :cool:. Hawaii still performing near the top 3 years later.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,117
1,905
126
If I overclock my 390X i'll be right there with the 980ti in this chart...talk about bang for the buck and GPU longevity :cool:. Hawaii still performing near the top 3 years later.
I know its completely ridiculous. Someone with a 290x can still survive and play today's games pretty well actually. I think that's pretty unbelievable, but that's where we are.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,573
126
Would the 960 have done better with 4gb of Vram?

I see that Tonga did okay with 2, but maybe it makes a difference with Maxwell?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY