Grand Theft Auto V (DX11)

Now a truly venerable title, GTA V is a veteran of past game suites that is still graphically demanding as they come. As an older DX11 title, it provides a glimpse into the graphically intensive games of yesteryear that don't incorporate the latest features. Originally released for consoles in 2013, the PC port came with a slew of graphical enhancements and options. Just as importantly, GTA V includes a rather intensive and informative built-in benchmark, somewhat uncommon in open-world games.

The settings are identical to its previous appearances, which are custom as GTA V does not have presets. To recap, a "Very High" quality is used, where all primary graphics settings turned up to their highest setting, except grass, which is at its own very high setting. Meanwhile 4x MSAA is enabled for direct views and reflections. This setting also involves turning on some of the advanced rendering features - the game's long shadows, high resolution shadows, and high definition flight streaming - but not increasing the view distance any further.

We've updated some of the benchmark automation and data processing steps, so results may vary at the 1080p mark compared to previous data.

Grand Theft Auto V - 3840x2160 - Very High Quality

Grand Theft Auto V - 2560x1440 - Very High Quality

Grand Theft Auto V - 1920x1080 - Very High Quality

GTA V is another game where the Radeon VII starts off on the back foot. Its 38% 4K performance improvement over the RX Vega 64 is outstanding and nothing to be scoffed at, but even this jump isn't enough to draw even with the GTX 1080 Ti FE and RTX 2080. Ultimately, it lands somewhere in between the reference RTX 2070 and RTX 2080.

Grand Theft Auto V - 99th Percentile - 3840x2160 - Very High Quality

Grand Theft Auto V - 99th Percentile - 2560x1440 - Very High Quality

Grand Theft Auto V - 99th Percentile - 1920x1080 - Very High Quality

Final Fantasy XV Middle-Earth: Shadow of War
Comments Locked

289 Comments

View All Comments

  • 29a - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    As usual in these garbage articles the prices given are nowhere near reality. The Vega 64 is $100 cheaper than what is listed.
  • RSAUser - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Anandtech doesn't ever seem to update reviews or prices.
    They'll compare a device from their history even if there have been months of driver updates that fixed performance issues, so they'll be using non-current info and everyone will assume it's current.
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    "Anandtech doesn't ever seem to update reviews or prices."

    On the contrary, quite a bit was updated for this review. Though as driver performance has been rather stable as of late, performance hasn't exactly gone anywhere for most cards on most games.

    If you see anything that seems wrong, please let us know. But we go out of our way to try to avoid using any card/driver combinations that result in performance issues.
  • Korguz - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    29a
    if you think AT does nothing but garbage articles.. then, lets see YOU do better...

    as for prices.. meh.. thats something hard to account for as there are things called exchange rates, and other variables that no one can predict.....
  • Phil85 - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    So when will prices of GPU's decrease? Is this the new normal?
  • eva02langley - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Navi should bring value back to mid-range.

    It is still a nice card for professional/compute/rendering. But for gaming, the price is maybe 50$ too expensive, and AMD really needs to get some better quality fans.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    If Navi is missing next generation features like ray tracing and tensor cores, there will be ZERO value to it.
  • eva02langley - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    AHAHAHAHA... Ray Tracing... you know the real problem of Ray Tracing? It was never on the table until Jensen brainwashed shill that it was important. by defending it, you obviously prove that you have no critical judgement.

    By the way, the problem with RT/DLSS is that it will never be implemented because AMD owns consoles, and that devs develop on consoles. There is no monetary benefit to implement gimmick proprietary gameworks features for 1% of the PC user base, unless if Nvidia is paying you to do so.

    It will never be a thing for the upcoming console generation. See you in 7 years, where it might be remotely relevant to the industry. As of now, unless you are rendering a CGI movie, it is worthless.
  • Dribble - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Both the next gen consoles are going to have ray tracing. Microsoft - who wrote and own the spec for the DX12 ray tracing extension currently used by PC's and hence a strong backer of ray tracing - will make one of them.
  • eva02langley - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Not going to happen because RTX is proprietary, it is a closed environment, and require hardware acceleration that AMD is not going to pursue in the short time. Nvidia shoot themselves in the foot by pushing it. Open source is the only way a new standard can be adopted. The whole G-synch fiasco should have been enough to prove it.

    Hardware could run it still, but the impact on performances is just to important. At that point, developers like Sony have incredible talent in creating new effect that look way more realistic.

    Just looking at The Last of Us Part 2 is a good example.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now