Battlefield V PC Graphics Benchmark

[Julio Franco]

After a preliminar look at Battlefield V during the open beta phase, we're back to check out GPU performance for the official release of the game. Before we'd found solid performance from both AMD and Nvidia GPUs and to confirm this we're now benchmarking a total of 38 new and previous generation graphics cards.

Read the full article here.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1746-battlefield-5-gpu-performance/

 

[BlackCarT]

So no CPU core scaling results?

What about Ryzen to i9 Same speed results ie: 4ghz

 

[TrexAverell]

So no CPU core scaling results?

What about Ryzen to i9 Same speed results ie: 4ghz

Switching from one CPU to another meant surely another 24h ban from EA so they avoided it

 

[BSim500]

Switching from one CPU to another meant surely another 24h ban from EA so they avoided it

Ah, DRM. Punishing only paying customers since the 80's...

 

[ShObiT]

Well, if my R9 380 can do 40+ in ultra, I have no issue playing in Medium to get 60+, this article made my day, now I only have to wait try 10 hours in Origin Access and then buy the game in the December sale. xD.

 

[Xallisto]

Locking you out for changing your hardware up, thats utterly disgraceful and totally pointless. What do they hope to gain by doing that?

 

[MaXtor]

Locking you out for changing your hardware up, thats utterly disgraceful and totally pointless. What do they hope to gain by doing that?

Not sure, maybe it's their desperate way of preventing account sharing?

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Locking you out for changing your hardware up, thats utterly disgraceful and totally pointless. What do they hope to gain by doing that?

More money of course.

 

[MiksteRRdY]

And in not a single one of your benchmarks you disabled "future frame rendering". This game runs ATROCIOUSLY when you disable that. It also introduces "input latency" a little bit, apparently, but it won't be a lot unless you only get a couple of frames more.

 

[Xallisto]

More money of course.

That's what I don't get, how does limiting the amount of hardware changes translate to more cash.

What business is it of EA how often you swap out a bit of hardware. Makes me red with anger it does.

 

[TrexAverell]

More money of course.

That's what I don't get, how does limiting the amount of hardware changes translate to more cash.

What business is it of EA how often you swap out a bit of hardware. Makes me red with anger it does.

They want you to buy another game key if you wanna play it on another rig. Like a kind of OEM license

 

[max0x7ba]

And in not a single one of your benchmarks you disabled "future frame rendering". This game runs ATROCIOUSLY when you disable that. It also introduces "input latency" a little bit, apparently, but it won't be a lot unless you only get a couple of frames more.

Why would you want to disable that option then?

 

[Bluescreendeath]

They want you to buy another game key if you wanna play it on another rig. Like a kind of OEM license

Yep. @Xallisto, See limited activations for Windows that require you to buy a new copy for new hardware if you run out of activations.

 

[GreenNova343]

Moving on, we have the 4K benchmark results and unsurprisingly the flagship GPUs from 2014 and 2015 aren’t cutting it anymore (when using 'ultra' quality settings, of course).

The GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2080 do well at 4K, but this is where the RTX 2080 Ti comes into its own delivering over 60 fps at all times, making for a breathtaking 4K gaming experience.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I could have sworn that the table up above clearly shows both the RTX 2080 & the 1080TI capable of hitting 60+ FPS (the former having a "1% min FPS" result of 61FPS, the latter 60FPS, & both of them hitting averages of 67 & 66 FPS respectively). That's right on the button for what would be described as "60+ FPS at 4K" performance...

 

[fictionaldan]

CPU is really important. I have an i5-4960 with a 1070 and I'm having trouble staying at a consistent 60fps even on medium settings.

 

[theunknown]

I question these benchmarks. I have an 8700k cpu, gtx 1080ti gpu, 32gb ddr4 ram and the game is installed on an nvme drive. I should be able to get consistent 100fps at 1440p with ultra setting. However on ultra settings the frames are fine until anything big happens (like a squad moving up on you) during the course of the game then there is massive (sub 30 fps) frame drop. It makes the game unenjoyable. I've had to drop settings to LOW to stop the massive frame drops. I'm hoping it's just poor optimization that can be fixed with a patch.

 

[moral hazard]

Oh man! My stuff is so old it can't even make it on this collection!

 

[Xallisto]

I question these benchmarks. I have an 8700k cpu, gtx 1080ti gpu, 32gb ddr4 ram and the game is installed on an nvme drive. I should be able to get consistent 100fps at 1440p with ultra setting. However on ultra settings the frames are fine until anything big happens (like a squad moving up on you) during the course of the game then there is massive (sub 30 fps) frame drop. It makes the game unenjoyable. I've had to drop settings to LOW to stop the massive frame drops. I'm hoping it's just poor optimization that can be fixed with a patch.

Maybe u should try framelocking the game, I have that same issue as you when the frame rate is up and down I find games to be unplayable. When that happens I lock the fps at the low 1% margain. that way it does not fluctuate much at all. And the experience is much better.

 

[jsper3602]

I question these benchmarks. I have an 8700k cpu, gtx 1080ti gpu, 32gb ddr4 ram and the game is installed on an nvme drive. I should be able to get consistent 100fps at 1440p with ultra setting. However on ultra settings the frames are fine until anything big happens (like a squad moving up on you) during the course of the game then there is massive (sub 30 fps) frame drop. It makes the game unenjoyable. I've had to drop settings to LOW to stop the massive frame drops. I'm hoping it's just poor optimization that can be fixed with a patch.

Are u using Direct X12 ? what drivers are u using? I had massive stutters and frame rate drops using direct x 12. Updating driver and using x11 dit the trick for me, although this games is a lot more demanding than battlefield 1. I have the same gpu and i7 8700k OC. I m playing at 4k ( 95%scaling) with 55-70 so far with the first two missions in the campaing. :=)

 

[theunknown]

Are u using Direct X12 ? what drivers are u using? I had massive stutters and frame rate drops using direct x 12. Updating driver and using x11 dit the trick for me, although this games is a lot more demanding than battlefield 1. I have the same gpu and i7 8700k OC. I m playing at 4k ( 95%scaling) with 55-70 so far with the first two missions in the campaing. :=)

I was using dx12. I keep the drivers up-to-date. I switched to dx11 with the low latency preset and the game is buttery smooth. maybe I just needed to switch to dx11 but right now the game play is so good at the low latency preset that I don't want to change it.

 

[Dean Kavanagh]

What’s going on with the r9 390, so close to the 380x and quite far from the 390x?

 

[hahahanoobs]

What’s going on with the r9 390, so close to the 380x and quite far from the 390x?

Or the 970 beating the Nano @ 4K.....

 

[Jo3yization]

Tested here /w a older i7-6700k + GTX 1070 Ti for reference, ultra 1440p:

Must be pretty CPU-heavy.