Battlefield 4

One of the older games in our benchmark suite, DICE’s Battlefield 4 remains a staple of MP gaming. Even at its age, Battlefield 4 remained a challenging game in its own right, as very few mass market MP shooters push the envelope on graphics quality right now. 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 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

When we designed this test suite last year, we opted to go without MSAA at 4K given its very high cost on the Frostbite engine. However with the GTX 1080 Ti, the card is fast enough that it is still going to hit smooth 60fps framerates even with MSAA. With a 33% performance lead over the GTX 1080 and a 74% performance lead over the GTX 980 Ti, you can in fact finally have it all with Battlefield 4, even at 4K.

Ashes of the Singularity Crysis 3
Comments Locked

161 Comments

View All Comments

  • eddman - Friday, March 10, 2017 - link

    Adjusted for inflation: http://i.imgur.com/ZZnTS5V.png
  • Meteor2 - Friday, March 10, 2017 - link

    Great charts!
  • mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Except they excude the Titans, Fury, etc.
  • eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    I, personally, made these charts.

    No titans because they are very niche cards for those gamers who cannot wait and/or have more money than sense. The following Ti variants perform almost as good as the titan cards anyway.

    No radeons because this is an nvidia-only chart. I should've titled it as such. I focused on nvidia because ATI/AMD usually don't price their cards so high.
  • mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Ok on the Radeon angled, shoulda realised it was NV only. :D

    However, your description of those who buy Titans cannot be anything than your own opinion, and what you don't realise is that for many store owners it's these very top-tier cards which bring in the majority of their important profit margins. They make far less on the mainstream cards. They enthusiast market is extremely important, whether or not one individually regards the products as being relevant for one's own needs. You need to be objective here.
  • mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Sorry for the typos... am on a train, wobbly kybd. :D Is this site ever gonna get modern and allow editing??...
  • eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    I think I am being objective. Titan cards do not fit into the regular geforce range. They are like an early pass. Wait a few months and you can have a Ti that performs the same at a much lower price.

    If nvidia never released a similar performing Ti card, I would've included them.
  • eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link

    Also I don't see how stores and their profits has anything to do with that.
  • Mr Perfect - Tuesday, March 14, 2017 - link

    Nice work on those charts.

    So there where a couple years where top tier cards where $400 or less. Inflation number normalize that price a fair bit though.
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link

    Those days are long-gone, and not just because of profit taking. 16/14nm FinFET GPUs are astonishingly expensive to design and fab. The masks are in the millions, and now everything has to be double-patterned.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now