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

  • Oxford Guy - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    This card is a turkey for gamers. AMD fixed the noise level problem with Fury X and now we're getting less value than we did then. It's too loud.

    "Also new to this card and something AMD will be keen to call out is their triple-fan cooler, replacing the warmly received blower on the Radeon RX Vega 64/56 cards."

    Is the sarcasm really necessary? If you're going to mention the cooler thing why not point out just how far AMD has regressed in terms of noise. Remember Fury X, a card that is nice under load?

    "Vega 20 has nothing on paper to push for its viability at consumer prices. And yet thanks to a fortunate confluence of factors, here we are."

    Oh please:

    Fiji: 596 mm2 for $650. Vega 10 495 mm2 for $500. Vega 20 331 mm2 for $700.

    Anandtech says it's all so shocking that Vega 20 is available to consumers at all. Eyeroll. No. For $700, AMD could have put that extra die area to more use and given us 8 GB of VRAM. But that would involve doing the impossible and making a GPU that is attractive to gamers, not just peddling low-end Polaris rehashes indefinitely.

    Consumers aren't getting the best value here. They're getting leftovers just as they did with Bulldozer/Piledriver — parts that were targeted at the server market first and not consumers. At least with Vega 20, though, there is some competitiveness, although this is mainly because Nvidia is artificially crippling the value of the GPU market with its inflated pricing strategy. That is what monopolies do, of course. Look at how long Intel was able to coast with Sandy-level performance.

    "At 3.5 TLFLOPS of theoretical FP64 performance, the Radeon VII is in a league of its own for the price. There simply aren’t any other current-generation cards priced below $2000 that even attempt to address the matter."

    That's marvelous for the people who are able to care about FP64, unlike gamers.

    This is what happens when there isn't enough competition in a market. Gamers get the choice of two shafts: Turing and Vega.
  • Oxford Guy - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Oh, yes... and the "console".

    At least the Switch is a real console. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about awful low-end PCs being falsely called consoles, which has been the practice since Jaguar became an (unfortunate) thing.
  • Korguz - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    like in a previous post of yours.. are you forgetting that the xbox and xbox 360 were also, " low end " pc's that your are claiming ?? the switch is a real console ?? ha.. the nintendo switch, is based off of the Tegra SoC's from nvidia... in a way.. " still " a low end PC......
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    The reason the Switch qualifies as a console is that it does something differently vis-à-vis the x86 gaming PC platform. It has a different form factor and related functionality. Artificial software walled gardens do not truly differentiate Sony and MS's low-end PCs from the PC gaming market. They are merely anti-consumer kludge that people have chosen to prop up with their cash.

    Merely having an x86 processor does not make something equivalent to an x86 PC. The Switch is clearly not the same thing as a low-end PC box like a Jaguar-based rubbish console. I am not particularly enamored with the Switch but at least Nintendo is offering something different to better justify its approach.
  • Korguz - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    this sounds more like your own personal opinion and nothing more.. for some reason you hate the current consoles, and seems like there is NO reason for your hate...

    nintendo has offered something different for a console since the 1st Wii, and honestly, look where it has gotten them... the xbox and playstation platforms outsold the nintendo systems, up to the switch, which has out sold the other 2.. but the games them selves on the nintendo systems.. are lacking..
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    "this sounds more like your own personal opinion and nothing more.. for some reason you hate the current consoles, and seems like there is NO reason for your hate..."

    Ad hominem isn't a rebuttal.
  • Korguz - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    still just sounds like your personal opinion, regardless
  • HorzaG - Sunday, February 10, 2019 - link

    Pointing out that (according to the poster) you're just expressing your opinion and "hate" without reasoning isn't an Ad hominem, you used the term incorrectly earlier in this thread also. Pretty embarrassing to be simultaneously so conceited and so wrong.

    "You should never listen to a word Oxford Guy has to say because he's a frothing fanboy whose posts reek of desperation and are probably indicative of an inability to get laid"

    That's an Ad hominem.
  • Korguz - Tuesday, February 12, 2019 - link

    and saying this :

    " You should never listen to a word Oxford Guy has to say because he's a frothing fanboy whose posts reek of desperation and are probably indicative of an inability to get laid "

    about someone.. doesnt prove your point any better...
  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, February 13, 2019 - link

    "Pretty embarrassing to be simultaneously so conceited and so wrong."

    It must be.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now