Dying Light Benchmarked, Performance Review

[Steve]

What the point of benchmarking game without using the highest preset?Why you turn off HBAO+?I see in all of your game benchmarks you don't use highest preset.Same in FC4.Lame website.

There are no presets. HBAO+ was disabled to try and keep the test as fair as possible between AMD and Nvidia.

This was even explained in the review to try and avoid people asking poorly worded questions such as this "Why you turn off HBAO+?" It is easier to read first, than waste time making foolish comments.

Still sorry for being a lame website.

Update: Unrelated to the post I was replying to above, I just wanted to point out that with the latest v1.2.1 patch for Dying Light fixes the view distance performance issues. Now when testing outside with 100% draw distance we are seeing the exact same performance we showed in our review.

 

[March5]

This is such a useless benchmark, and in all honesty a waste of time. Its already well established that the beginning prologue barely stresses the cpu or gpu. Your going to get high frames on even the lowest end hardware. Why in the world you would not run a benchmark on the open world (not the top of the tower) is beyond me. 99% of the game takes place outside where the frame rate drops by over 50% of what was seen indoors. Your bench is just completely flawed.

 

[Steve]

This is such a useless benchmark, and in all honesty a waste of time. Its already well established that the beginning prologue barely stresses the cpu or gpu. Your going to get high frames on even the lowest end hardware. Why in the world you would not run a benchmark on the open world (not the top of the tower) is beyond me. 99% of the game takes place outside where the frame rate drops by over 50% of what was seen indoors. Your bench is just completely flawed.

Here we go. We have since re-tested outside with the latest 1.2.1v patch and the frame rates are almost identical to what we shown in our review.

Its already well established that the beginning prologue barely stresses the cpu or gpu. Your going to get high frames on even the lowest end hardware.

Absolute rubbish. It is well established is it? Yet most GPU's delivered well under a 50fps average and were found to suffer from noticeable frame rate lag.

 

[loguerto]

Guys how did you reach 60 fps with the 8320e??? I have that cpu at 4.0 ghz with a r9 290, 8gb ram, 990fx ud5 mb and I play at 25/30 fps with deeps down to 15 fps, this game really is unplayable! I have all the drivers up to date, same with drivers in fact I play all the other games flawlessly .

 

[NightAntilli]

I'd love to see the CPU performance of other cheap chips like the Athlon 750K and 860K.

 

[marvinerzz]

I'm going to build a rig just for this game. It's been 4 years since I played Dead Island, and I'm very surprised to see that my video card back then would be obsolete for this. Well to be fair, life caught up to me. In any case, this test helps a lot in my goal. Helps me map my project specs and budget. Thank you mr. Steve, your work here means so much. Just one question though. How would a Core2Quad stack up here? My budget only lets me go for either a fresh Q9400 2.6Ghz or a used i5 that goes a few steps above advertised minimum. Any opinion or observation will help a lot.

 

[EClyde]

Been playing this for a month. It's fun. Got it for $18