PCGHFar CryPrimal benchmarks

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

csbin

Senior member
Feb 4, 2013
907
611
136
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Far-Cry-Primal-Spiel-56176/Specials/Benchmark-Test-1187476/


AMD Radeon Software 16.2 Beta

Nvidia Geforce 362.00 Beta



1080P

OO77F.jpg






1440P

MHj2O.jpg





4K
6HMBo.jpg
 
R

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
EVGA 980 Ti SC is dominant at 1080p and 1440p. Fury X gets close to 980 Ti SC at 4k. But the killer card imo is the R9 390 which is selling for almost half the price of 980 Ti but has 73% performance of 980 Ti at 1440p.The wheels come off the GTX 970 at 4k ( my guess is the 3.5G/0.5G memory partition is the culprit).
 
H

Head1985

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2014
1,867
699
136
GTX960 4GB at 1430Mhz with 30fps and slower than 270x...LOL nvidia...GTX960 is 1080P card?sure...
Maybe 720p...
 
Last edited:
K

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,505
2,250
136
Why do they put the FuryX below the TitanX in the resolutions the FuryX has better fps?
 
4K_shmoorK

4K_shmoorK

Senior member
Jul 1, 2015
464
43
91
Kenmitch said:
Why do they put the FuryX below the TitanX in the resolutions the FuryX has better fps?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing the chart does the hierarchical sort of cards based on the 1080p benchmarks by default. And does not change once the filter for 1440, 4K are applied. Nothing to lose sleep over.

390/390X looking very good for a Nvidia/GW title.

As far as the game goes, par for the course really for Ubisoft. Might as well pick up Far Cry 3 or 4 and save some cash, as they are largely all the same game...:sneaky:
 
K

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,505
2,250
136
4K_shmoorK said:
I'm guessing the chart does the hierarchical sort of cards based on the 1080p benchmarks by default. And does not change once the filter for 1440, 4K are applied. Nothing to lose sleep over.

390/390X looking very good for a Nvidia/GW title.

As far as the game goes, par for the course really for Ubisoft. Might as well pick up Far Cry 3 or 4 and save some cash, as they are largely all the same game...:sneaky:
Click to expand...

No sleep lost. Just seems like a silly way to do the charts.

No go at $60 for me. Maybe once the price drops drastically I'll bite. Already have the other Far Cry games. The new theme looks interesting. Guess it depends on how the updates react with AMD cards in the end.
 
4K_shmoorK

4K_shmoorK

Senior member
Jul 1, 2015
464
43
91
Kenmitch said:
No sleep lost. Just seems like a silly way to do the charts.

No go at $60 for me. Maybe once the price drops drastically I'll bite. Already have the other Far Cry games. The new theme looks interesting. Guess it depends on how the updates react with AMD cards in the end.
Click to expand...

Same here. No guns looks intriguing, but I watcheda buddy play who picked it up on XB1 last Tuesday and it truly is Farcry 4 without guns. But you can tame tigers and other big cats to come to your aid and tear up some cave men.

Looks like the 390X and 980 don't swap at 1440 and higher either. Must just be a sorting thing.
 
T

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,734
514
126
www.facebook.com
raghu78 said:
EVGA 980 Ti SC is dominant at 1080p and 1440p. Fury X gets close to 980 Ti SC at 4k. But the killer card imo is the R9 390 which is selling for almost half the price of 980 Ti but has 73% performance of 980 Ti at 1440p.
Click to expand...

The value of the 390 can't be understated, but 40fps average is no fun IMO. Also, you're looking at how much slower than 390 is than the 980 TI according to your math (using the 980 TI as the base performance index). The 980 TI is 37% faster ((54.4-39.7)/39.7) when the 390 is normalized to the baseline performance factor. I prefer to compare how much of a speed bump something is, like if I was upgrading, instead of how much slower something is i.e. downgrading. But to each his own.
 
Last edited:
M

MiRai

Member
Dec 3, 2010
159
1
91
Kenmitch said:
Yep.

I see no SLI or Crossfire in the charts. It's disabled? Not tested yet?
Click to expand...
I watched TotalBiscuit's review of the game, and he said that SLI doesn't work at this time. He was also getting some pretty bad performance overall, but let people know that there wasn't a "game ready" driver available when he recorded that footage, so it's likely going to change.
 
R

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
tviceman said:
The value of the 390 can't be understated, but 40fps average is no fun IMO. Also, you're looking at how much slower than 390 is than the 980 TI according to your math (using the 980 TI as the base performance index). The 980 TI is 37% faster ((54.4-39.7)/39.7) when the 390 is normalized to the baseline performance factor. I prefer to compare how much of a speed bump something is, like if I was upgrading, instead of how much slower something is i.e. downgrading. But to each his own.
Click to expand...

yeah if 390 is kept as baseline 980 Ti SC is 37% faster. btw the R9 390 min fps is still 34 fps at 1440p. I think each person has different comfort levels on playability wrt avg/min fps. But imo the R9 390 is definitely playable at 1440p. With a bit of OC the game can be enjoyed on R9 390 at 1440p. Obviously if you want the best experience you get that with a 980 Ti SC but at almost twice the price of R9 390.

computerbase shows an even better showing for R9 390 at 1440p. 980 Ti Gaming G1 is 33% faster than R9 390 (ref) and 30% faster than R9 390 Gaming . probably different test area and/or settings. impressive nonetheless.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-02/far-cry-primal-benchmarks/2/#diagramm-far-cry-primal-2560-1440
 
Last edited:
C

caswow

Senior member
Sep 18, 2013
525
136
116
you can even lower settings to achieve higher fps. you almost never need highest settings to have good visuals.
 
L

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,598
1,238
136
The R9 390/290 are again showing impressive performance vs the 970.
 
Last edited:
crisium

crisium

Platinum Member
Aug 19, 2001
2,643
615
136
Very demanding. I'm not interested in this game right now, but it would take quite the tweaking for 1440 60fps on any card. Too bad everything can't run as well as Battlefront.

Somewhat AMD favoured, although arguably not since it's becoming more typical to see similar results to this. Legs.
 
H

Head1985

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2014
1,867
699
136
linkgoron said:
The R9 390/290 are again showing impressive performance vs the 970.
Click to expand...
yep and also 7970(280x) is pretty fast.Almost on par with stock GTX970.Oh boy Nv cards looks like crap lately.Nv focusing already on pascal in drivers? :sneaky:
GTX960 cant manage even 30fps at 1080P.
 
Last edited:
C

csbin

Senior member
Feb 4, 2013
907
611
136
4K_shmoorK said:
I'm guessing the chart does the hierarchical sort of cards based on the 1080p benchmarks by default. And does not change once the filter for 1440, 4K are applied. Nothing to lose sleep over.

390/390X looking very good for a Nvidia/GW title.

As far as the game goes, par for the course really for Ubisoft. Might as well pick up Far Cry 3 or 4 and save some cash, as they are largely all the same game...:sneaky:
Click to expand...

No gameworks this time around
 
3

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
csbin said:
3440*1440


12wfO8.jpg
Click to expand...
I thought they listed them by minimums as far as ranking on the chart? The Titan X/12G is looking pretty bad coming in below the Fury nitro, and it's probably a good idea that they don't list a reference 980 ti, since it would look even worse.

raghu78 said:
EVGA 980 Ti SC is dominant at 1080p and 1440p. Fury X gets close to 980 Ti SC at 4k. But the killer card imo is the R9 390 which is selling for almost half the price of 980 Ti but has 73% performance of 980 Ti at 1440p.The wheels come off the GTX 970 at 4k ( my guess is the 3.5G/0.5G memory partition is the culprit).
Click to expand...

The 970 is simply a poor card. People were warned by a lot of people, but they chose to fall for the Jedi mind tricks.
 
B

Bacon1

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2016
3,430
1,018
91
3DVagabond said:
I thought they listed them by minimums as far as ranking on the chart? The Titan X/12G is looking pretty bad coming in below the Fury nitro, and it's probably a good idea that they don't list a reference 980 ti, since it would look even worse.
Click to expand...

Looks like its ordered by 1080p results, since both min and avg of Titan are lower than Fury X.
 
H

Head1985

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2014
1,867
699
136
3DVagabond said:
The 970 is simply a poor card. People were warned by a lot of people, but they chose to fall for the Jedi mind tricks.
Click to expand...
GTX970 is 1080p card and its just fine in that resolution.After oc to 1500/8000 you have faster card than GTX980.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom