Battlefield 4

Kicking off our 2015 benchmark suite is Battlefield 4, DICE’s 2013 multiplayer military shooter. After a rocky start, Battlefield 4 has since become a challenging game in its own right and a showcase title for low-level graphics APIs. As these benchmarks are from single player mode, based on our experiences our rule of thumb here is that multiplayer framerates will dip to half our single player framerates, which means a card needs to be able to average at least 60fps if it’s to be able to hold up in multiplayer.

Battlefield 4 - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality - 0x MSAA

Battlefield 4 - 3840x2160 - Medium Quality

Battlefield 4 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

After stripping away the Frostbite engine’s expensive (and not wholly effective) MSAA, what we’re left with for BF4 at 4K with Ultra quality puts the GTX Titan X in a pretty good light. At 58.3fps it’s not quite up to the 60fps mark, but it comes very close, close enough that the GTX Titan X should be able to stay above 30fps virtually the entire time, and never drop too far below 30fps in even the worst case scenario. Alternatively, dropping to Medium quality should give the GTX Titan X plenty of headroom, with an average framerate of 94.8fps meaning even the lowest framerate never drops below 45fps.

From a benchmarking perspective Battlefield 4 at this point is a well optimized title that’s a pretty good microcosm of overall GPU performance. In this case we find that the GTX Titan X performs around 33% better than the GTX 980, which is almost exactly in-line with our earlier performance predictions. Keeping in mind that while GTX Titan X has 50% more execution units than GTX 980, it’s also clocked at around 88% of the clockspeed, so 33% is right where we should be in a GPU-bound scenario.

Otherwise compared to the GTX 780 Ti and the original GTX Titan, the performance advantage at 4K is around 50% and 66% respectively. GTX Titan X is not going to double the original Titan’s performance – there’s only so much you can do without a die shrink – but it continues to be amazing just how much extra performance NVIDIA has been able to wring out without increasing power consumption and with only a minimal increase in die size.

On the broader competitive landscape, this is far from the Radeon R9 290X/290XU’s best title, with GTX Titan X leading by 50-60%. However this is also a showcase title for when AFR goes right, as the R9 295X2 and GTX 980 SLI both shoot well past the GTX Titan X, demonstrating the performance/consistency tradeoff inherent in multi-GPU setups.

Finally, shifting gears for a moment, gamers looking for the ultimate 1440p card will not be disappointed. GTX Titan X will not get to 120fps here (it won’t even come close), but at 78.7fps it’s well suited for driving 1440p144 displays. In fact it’s the only single-GPU card to do better than 60fps at this resolution.

Our 2015 GPU Benchmark Suite & The Test Crysis 3
Comments Locked

276 Comments

View All Comments

  • Jdubo - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    290x was the original Titan killer. Not only did it kill the original release but killed its over-inflated price as well. I suspect the next reiteration of AMD flagship card will be Titan X killer as well. History usually repeats itself over and over again.
  • jay401 - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    You say this is not the same type of pro-sumer card as the previous Titan yet the price is the same. No thanks.
  • Ballist1x - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    No gtx970/970 sli in the review;) Anand you let the consumers down...
  • H3ld3r - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    R9 290x only haves 4Gb at 5ghz and does a awsome job at 4k. the 295 only operates with 4Gb the other 4 are mirrored and shines in 4k. So i can't understand everybody concerns with 4k gaming with upcoming fiji. This Titan X has 12GB at 7Ghz and only shows how gddr5 is obsolete.
  • oranos - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    The ratio of potential buyers to comments on this article is atronomical.
  • leignheart - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    Hello everyone, I would like you to read the final words on the Titan X. It says the performance increase over a single gtx 980 is 33%, except the price is 100% over the gtx 980. If you are lucky enough to pay just 1000$ for the Titan X. Please people do not waste your money on this card. If you do then Nvidia will keep releasing Extremely overpriced cards. DO NOT BUY THIS CARD.
    Please instead wait for the gtx 980 TI if you want dx12. I will certainly pay 1 grand and more for a card, but this card is a particular rip off at that price point. Don't just throw your money away. Read the performance chart yourself, it is in no way shape or form worth 1000$.
  • Dug - Monday, March 30, 2015 - link

    I suppose we can't buy a Rolex, Tesla, a vacation condo, or even a pony?
    Paying for the best available is always more money. Get a job where another $500 doesn't affect you when you purchase something. Plus price is only perception on worth. People could say $20 is too much for a video card and they would be right.
  • themac79 - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    I wish they would have thrown in 780sli, which is what I run. I would like to have more VRAM, but I'm running all the new games pretty much maxed out. I made the mistake of buying them when they first came out and payed over $600 a piece. I will definitely wait for price drops this time.
  • H3ld3r - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    You need is more transistors, memory speed, stream processors, bus, rops, tmu's not memory amount
  • Archetype - Friday, March 20, 2015 - link

    4K gaming not quite there yet. Not going to pay $500+ for it. And in the mean time still jamming Full HD games like a baws using my old 280X "on my Full HD monitor".

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now