Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus (Vulkan)

id Software is popularly known for a few games involving shooting stuff until it dies, just with different 'stuff' for each one: Nazis, demons, or other players while scorning the laws of physics. Wolfenstein II is the latest of the first, the sequel of a modern reboot series developed by MachineGames and built on id Tech 6. While the tone is significantly less pulpy nowadays, the game is still a frenetic FPS at heart, succeeding DOOM as a modern Vulkan flagship title and arriving as a pure Vullkan implementation rather than the originally OpenGL DOOM.

Featuring a Nazi-occupied America of 1961, Wolfenstein II is lushly designed yet not oppressively intensive on the hardware, something that goes well with its pace of action that emerge suddenly from a level design flush with alternate historical details.

The highest quality preset, "Mein leben!", was used. Wolfenstein II also features Vega-centric GPU Culling and Rapid Packed Math, as well as Radeon-centric Deferred Rendering; in accordance with the preset, neither GPU Culling nor Deferred Rendering was enabled.

Wolfenstein II - 2560x1440 -

Wolfenstein II - 1920x1080 -

For a game that scales well and enables high framerates with minimal CPU bottleneck, Wolfenstein II has the tradeoff of needing more than 4GB at highest quality settings. This even applies to 1080p! Limited VRAM truly bottlenecks the GPU here, where a card like the enthusiast-grade GTX 980 (4GB) would typically hold its own against the mainstream-grade GTX 1060 6GB.

And so NVIDIA's historical stinginess with video memory hurts them hard here, hammering Maxwell 2 performance as only the GTX 980 Ti and above have more than 4GB of VRAM. The 2GB GTX 960 is reduced to a stuttering fit. Meanwhile, the Hawaii refresh R9 390, whose 8GB memory configuration upgrade was laughed at in 2015, has the last laugh in Wolfenstein II.

Usually, games that devour excessive VRAM have no real reason to do so other than being poor console ports. But the way Wolfenstein II runs on Vulkan has continually impressed me on many levels. It removes so much of the CPU bottleneck and truly enables usage of ultra high refresh rates at any resolution and for a bonafide AA/AAA title. The equally high 99th percentiles are perfect for VR purposes or silky-smooth 'just works' gaming, because regardless Wolfenstein II is a good-looking game. The game and engine also takes a liking to Turing, Vega, and Polaris based cards. If the VRAM consumption is not merely a correlation or coincidence, then that's a perfectly acceptable tradeoff to me.

The spare performance leaves multiple opportunities, too, and as a naive example I wonder if it'd be possible to implement something like DXR accelerated real-time raytracing at 4Kp60.

Wolfenstein II - 99th Percentile - 2560x1440 -

Wolfenstein II - 99th Percentile - 1920x1080 -

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation Final Fantasy XV
Comments Locked

136 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kriswithak - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link

    I would love to see if the improved process offers better efficiency.
    With the RX480 4gb, I undervolted the card and saw a significant decrease in load power consumption.

    With the RX580 8gb, I dropped the boost clocks a bit and dropped the voltage as well, and only used 6 pin power connector.

    I would like to see the rx590/580/480 at similar reference/boost clocks, then undervolted to lowest possible stable and see what the frame per watt comparison is.
  • Nfarce - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link

    Just another example of AMD shooting their R&D wad at the APU/CPU segment and ignoring the GPU segment. There is ZERO reason to buy this fail over Nivdia unless you have already bought a Freesync monitor and a much older AMD GPU, which monitors, by the way, do work with Nvidia GPUs when locking down the v-sync tool. I have a Freesync 75Hz monitor ( 32" 1440p AOC) and love it with my GTX 1070 Ti locking in frames (bought it for $369 on NewEgg in a promo sale). Said 1070 Ti doesn't even need to breathe hard. Minimum FPS never comes close to hitting 75 FPS. Not only is it 30+% faster, but it also consumes nearly 20% less power under load than this card. Yeah, that's worth the extra $80 for my 1070 Ti in my book. You get what you pay for. I really hope AMD starts using some of their Ryzen revenue that they've been taking in for - nearly three years now mind you and not including their revenue stream from game console APUs - into upping their dedicated GPU game. Because they have a long way to go to match Nvidia in the upper tiers where the real price margin revenue is made. Nobody makes money on low and mid range GPUs where AMD has always targeted.
  • eva02langley - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    You are missing the point here, Lisa Su said that decision are took 3-5 years in advance for their roadmap.

    Polaris was already a thing and just making a 12 nm was an easy thing to do and was filling a gap.

    People tend to forget that the 8GB RX 580 MSRP is actually 240$, not 200$ which is for the 4GB version. 30$ more is not such a step and still the cost per FPS is one of the lowest.

    With a 100$+ of game bundle to add to it, there is no question that the value is there.
  • Flunk - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link

    Slightly overclocked RX 480 from two years ago? Wake me when AMD actually releases a new GPU.
  • Cyborg997 - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link

    Can't believe this s*** with an AMD. 3 years with the same chips. What the f*** please give us something worth our money. Still have my Fury 9 running
  • Assimilator87 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    While everyone upped their resolution to UHD, I went the opposite direction and am running a CRT at 720p. My 7970's still running strong lol. CPU market is fire right now, but GPUs so boring =\
  • piroroadkill - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    So it sits somewhere between the 1060 6GB and 1070, most of the time closer to the former, and yet consumes a lot more power than either card. No thanks. People don't want noisy, hot systems these days without actually getting some performance to back it up.
  • eva02langley - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    It is actually quieter... check higher... seriously... people.
  • Lolimaster - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    It's really sad that 2 years after, performance per dollar went down.

    2 years more and we will have an APU with similar power than the RX580 on a $150 chip...
  • ItsAlive - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    Now undervolt and overclock that gtx 1060, Mine was able to drop over 100mv, lowered power limit to 75%, but still overclocked 200/400 core/mem clocks and uses 75w max at full load. Temps typically run mid 60s with stock fan settings and its near silent. Its a mini card that is probably 1/3 the size of the RX590 and I bought it over a year ago for $250.

    If a stock gtx1060 uses typcially 120 watts max (mine would before the undervolt), then total system power for an undervolted card according to the charts in the article would look like this:

    GTX1060/RX590/Fatboy
    --------------------------------
    BF1: 210w/363w/379w
    Furmark: 206w/330w/362w

    I would be interested to see an undervolted RX590 vs undervolted GTX1060 for a better comparison.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now