GPU 2016 Benchmark Suite & The Test

As this is the first high-end card release for 2016, we have gone ahead and updated our video card benchmarking suite. Unfortunately Broadwell-E launched just a bit too late for this review, so we’ll have to hold off on updating the underlying platform to Intel’s latest and greatest for a little while longer yet.

For the 2016 suite we have retained Grand Theft Auto V, Battlefield 4, and of course, Crysis 3. Joining these games are 6 new games: Rise of the Tomb Raider, DiRT Rally, Ashes of the Singularity, The Witcher 3, The Division, and the 2016 rendition of Hitman.

AnandTech GPU Bench 2016 Game List
Game Genre API(s)
Rise of the Tomb Raider Action DX11
DiRT Rally Racing DX11
Ashes of the Singularity RTS DX12
Battlefield 4 FPS DX11
Crysis 3 FPS DX11
The Witcher 3 RPG DX11
The Division FPS DX11
Grand Theft Auto V Action/Open World DX11
Hitman (2016) Action/Stealth DX11 + DX12

As was the case in 2015, the API used will be based on the best API available for a given card. Rise of the Tomb Raider and Hitman both support DirectX 11 + DirectX 12; in the case of Tomb Raider the DX12 path was until last week a regression – a new patch changed things too late for this article – and meanwhile the best API for Hitman depends on whether we’re looking at an AMD or NVIDIA card. For now Tomb Raider is benchmarked using DX11 and Hitman on both DX11 and DX12. Meanwhile Ashes of the Singularity is essentially tailor made for DirectX 12, as the first DX12 game to be designed for it as opposed to porting over a DX11 engine, so it is being run under DX12 at all times.

Meanwhile from a design standpoint our benchmark settings remain unchanged. For lower-end cards we’ll look at 1080p at various quality settings when practical, and for high-end cards we’ll be looking at 1080p and above at the highest quality settings.

The Test

As for our hardware testbed, it remains unchanged from 2015, being composed of an overclocked Core i7-4960X housed in an NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition case.

CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200i
Hard Disk: Samsung SSD 840 EVO (750GB)
Memory: G.Skill RipjawZ DDR3-1866 4 x 8GB (9-10-9-26)
Case: NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition
Monitor: Asus PQ321
Video Cards: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680
AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon Fury X
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
AMD Radeon R9 390X
AMD Radeon R9 390
AMD Radeon HD 7970
Video Drivers: NVIDIA Release 368.39
AMD Radeon Software Crimson 16.7.1 (RX 480)
AMD Radeon Software Crimson 16.6.2 (All Others)
OS: Windows 10 Pro
Meet the GeForce GTX 1080 & GTX 1070 Founders Edition Cards Rise of the Tomb Raider
Comments Locked

200 Comments

View All Comments

  • bill44 - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    That's the problem. I know nothing about the 900 series audio capabilities (which I suppose is the same as the 800 series ;) ) and no one publishes them in review. All reviews are incomplete.

    Anyone here knows at least the supported audio sampling rates? If not, I think my best bet is going with AMD (which I'm shure supports 88.2 & 176.4 KHz).
  • bill44 - Saturday, July 23, 2016 - link

    Anyone?
  • poohbear - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    thank you for the review, late as it is it's still an excellent review and love the details!
  • junky77 - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    In other reviews, even a Haswell-E is limited for GPUs like GTX 1070
  • JamesAnthony - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    I really appreciate all the work that went into this in depth review.

    I especially am very glad that you included the GTX 680 in the benchmarks along with all the other cards after it.
    It's often really hard to get an overview of performance over a couple years.

    I'm looking at upgrading 2 systems from GTX680 to either GTX 1070 or GTX 1060 and Titan (original one) to GTX 1080, so this helps see what the performance would be like.
    Hopefully you tested the 1060 the same way so I can just plug the numbers for it into the same graph.

    Thanks again!
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    Be sure to check Bench. The 1060 results are already there, so you can see those comparisons right now.
  • fivefeet8 - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    2nd page 3rd paragraph: "generational increate in performance". ;increase?
    2nd page 2nd section: "Pascal in an architecture that I’m not sure has any real parallel on a historical basis". ;is?
  • hansmuff - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    Great review, i like that you went into all the hardware details. Worth the wait.
  • Chaser - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    I'm a Nvidia guy all the way. For now. I am disappointed in the midrange RX480 and it's power consumption compared to the competition, especially after they had said that Polaris was goingto primarily be an efficiency improvement.
    Outside of my bias I truly hope AMD provides a very competitive flagship in the near future. Everyone wins. But with the 1060 now announced it just makes AMD's GPU prospects and profitability questionable.
  • MarkieGcolor - Wednesday, July 20, 2016 - link

    So basically after all the hype about finfet, we get a standard, if not disappointing jump this generation also with a price hike. I'm so relieved that I didn't wait for this generation and can just enjoy my current 970 sli/nano crossfire rigs. AMD easily has the opportunity to blow these cards out of the water with big gpus.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now