PCLabNeed for Speed - Graphics Card Benchmarks

[Madpacket]

So it is unoptimized for nVidia and a feature which needs to be disabled for a fair test. :thumbsup:

The difference here is FXAA looks like crap and with TAA enabled the game is still totally playable (on both cards). This isn't a gimpworks feature where performance is destroyed for little or no benefit.

 

[Erenhardt]

This test showed up a couple of days ago but I didn't want to post it to not generate traffic for them.

It shows exactly opposite to what the rest of the world shows. Even in the most biased amd games they still have nvidia wining. Hitman, the Division...

Shame you guys can't understand the conclusion they are making. [H] level of ridiculousness and beyond.

 

[TheELF]

well said. :thumbsup:



There are other sites too which show better performance for AMD cards. pclab is known to be extremely pro-Nvidia. so no surprises.

http://www.tomshardware.de/ea-need-...hmarks-performance,testberichte-242070-2.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Need-...563/Specials/Benchmarks-Technik-Test-1188606/

http://gamegpu.com/racing-simulators-/-gonki/need-for-speed-test-gpu.html

Always read "terms and conditions" pclab actually plays the game

Testy przeprowadziliśmy podczas przejazdu jedną z ruchliwych ulic w widoku zza samochodu.
=
Tests conducted during the passage of one of the busiest streets in the view behind the car.

While the others are just driving along behind a very small group of cars
http://www.tomshardware.de/ea-need-...nchmarks-performance,testberichte-242070.html

Als Szene nutzen wir bewusst keine freie Fahrt, sondern den Einzelspielermodus ohne störende Server-Trolle und ein normales Sprint-Rennen, bei dem wir möglichst nah hinter dem Feld herfahren, damit eine optimale Grafiklast entsteht.
=
As scene we consciously use no free ride, but the single-player mode without disturbing Server trolls and a normal sprint race, in which we herfahren as close as possible behind the field, so that optimum load graphics created.

I'm not saying which way is more telling for someone who is trying to determine how the game will run for him...but it's the first way.

 

[poofyhairguy]

http://gamegpu.com/racing-simulators-/-gonki/need-for-speed-test-gpu.html

hmm, they show at 1080p this to be the least surprising title of 2016:

Everything is in the order we expect at the end of 2015.

980 ti>Fury x>Nano>980>290x>780 ti>970>290>380x>290x

Not a lot of surprises there.

 

[thesmokingman]

This test showed up a couple of days ago but I didn't want to post it to not generate traffic for them.

It shows exactly opposite to what the rest of the world shows. Even in the most biased amd games they still have nvidia wining. Hitman, the Division...

Shame you guys can't understand the conclusion they are making. [H] level of ridiculousness and beyond.

Taking it further, it shows the intent of anyone posting their reviews. :sneaky:

 

[happy medium]

So my i3 6100/overclocked gtx960 4gb should give a minimum of 50fps @ 1080p @ ultra settings?
I'm happy, I like racing games.

 

[AtenRa]

So my i3 6100/overclocked gtx960 4gb should give a minimum of 50fps @ 1080p @ ultra settings?
I'm happy, I like racing games.

Not with TAA on, but it will be playable.

 

[moonbogg]

hmm, they show at 1080p this to be the least surprising title of 2016:

Everything is in the order we expect at the end of 2015.

980 ti>Fury x>Nano>980>290x>780 ti>970>290>380x>290x

Not a lot of surprises there.

OMG look at my 980Ti SLI! Hess Yell BABY ROCK ON!

 

[MrTeal]

hmm, they show at 1080p this to be the least surprising title of 2016:

Everything is in the order we expect at the end of 2015.

980 ti>Fury x>Nano>980>290x>780 ti>970>290>380x>290x

Not a lot of surprises there.

Don't forget that other constant of 2015, Crossfire not working on day one.

Hopefully AMD gets a Duo Pro system into every developer's hands larger than a few dudes in a garage.

 

[kondziowy]

Omfg stop it guys I dying of laughter reading your posts But so true the last 2 @up

 

[poofyhairguy]

Don't forget that other constant of 2015, Crossfire not working on day one.

 

[funboy6942]

And yet the i5 2500k is over $300 new, and the fx 9370 is $199, still $100 or so more, which could buy you your motherboard

 

[happy medium]

And yet the i5 2500k is over $300 new, and the fx 9370 is $199, still $100 or so more, which could buy you your motherboard

Be better off buying 125$ i3 6100 and a 140$ z170 board. would be faster than a 2500k or FX 9590 @ 4.7 .

 

[poofyhairguy]

And yet the i5 2500k is over $300 new

What?

I bought a new-in-box 2600k for $180 last year. You know, the chip fourth from the top?

Most new 2500ks if you can get them shouldn't be more than $150.

 

[funboy6942]

What?

I bought a new-in-box 2600k for $180 last year. You know, the chip fourth from the top?

Most new 2500ks if you can get them shouldn't be more than $150.

you can get them around $150 used on ebay, but new.....

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-i5-2500K-Quad-Core-Processor-Cache/dp/B004EBUXHQ

And yours, $199 used to start, and $445 new....

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-2600K-Quad-Core-Processor-Cache/dp/B004FA8NOQ

Im sure both can be had cheaper, elsewhere, but Im just using these places as a start for Im to lazy right now to go deep digging....

 

[AtenRa]

What?

I bought a new-in-box 2600k for $180 last year. You know, the chip fourth from the top?

Most new 2500ks if you can get them shouldn't be more than $150.

Both 2500K/2600K and FX8350/9370 are far better than any Core i3 even Skylake. The only thing that Core i3 Skylake has an advantage is the platform.

 

[Piroko]

Be better off buying 125$ i3 6100 and a 140$ z170 board. would be faster than a 2500k or FX 9590 @ 4.7 .

140$ on the motherboard for an i3? Far better off buying an i5 with a 70$ motherboard...

 

[b-mac]

I feel bad for anyone who bought a 770 over the 7970/280x. Just funny how much the 770 has fallen on its face.

 

[tential]

I feel bad for anyone who bought a 770 over the 7970/280x. Just funny how much the 770 has fallen on its face.

I warned people....
So many people did.

Even in this biased review site the 390 ties the 970 at my 1440p resolution.... lol.

 

[thesmokingman]

lol there are still ppl arguing the 680/770 is faster. The jedi mind tricks are still working.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

The real losers are the people who bought 660 Tis over 7950s. 192-bit 1.5GB. D:

 

[Piroko]

Quote from the Anandtech GTX 660 Review:

The end result is that the GTX 660 is on average 4% ahead of the 7870

Who knew that this was a typo.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

Always read "terms and conditions" pclab actually plays the game

Translation: tested at an area that shows NV in the best light.

 

[happy medium]

140$ on the motherboard for an i3? Far better off buying an i5 with a 70$ motherboard...

Not if I overclock....:thumbsup:
I will overclock my i3 more soon and later my new Kabylake 7700k on the same board..

 

[TheELF]

Translation: tested at an area that shows NV in the best light.

Well, if you go there then, the other sites tested a online only game in off line mode just to make amd look better...

No matter how one looks at it,different testing methods will produce different results,everybody should read up on what exactly is being benchmarked before drawing conclusions.