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 -

Wolfenstein II - 99th Percentile - 2560x1440 -

Wolfenstein II - 99th Percentile - 1920x1080 -

As we've seen before, Turing and Vega tend to run well on Wolfenstein II. For our games, these results are the only other title where the RX 590 is at least even with the GTX 1660. Meanwhile, the GTX 1060 3GB stumbles for want of VRAM, especially in the 99th percentiles. To that end, the GTX 1660 is more than 3X the performance of the GTX 1060 3GB, but also well ahead of the GTX 1060 6GB by 35% or more.

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation Final Fantasy XV
Comments Locked

77 Comments

View All Comments

  • The_Assimilator - Friday, March 15, 2019 - link

    1660 Ti power usage: more for GPU, less for GDDR6. 1660: less for GPU (due to 2 fewer SMs), but more for GDDR5. Hence why overall power usage for both is the same. What I still don't understand is why all of these cards, despite being rated to draw under 150W, come with 8-pin power connectors; 6-pin would make far more sense and would make them compatible with many older systems.
  • Alistair - Friday, March 15, 2019 - link

    They are still holding back. This would have been an incredible 7nm card. That's still what I want. Not interested.
  • backpackbrady - Saturday, March 16, 2019 - link

    amazing post ryan / nate!@# hoping you could answer a question beyond my knowledge for me. would the 1660 hardware-based encoder nvenc be at a disadvantage with the TU116 and GDDR5 changes? im not sure what effects the encoders performance. thank you very much for your time and knowledge. brady
  • Hrel - Tuesday, March 19, 2019 - link

    Suddenly Nvidia's pricing seems completely fair.
  • Supercell99 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    Chinese are done dumping after market GFX cards. Used market is drying up
  • Hrel - Saturday, March 30, 2019 - link

    This is looking like one hell of a good card for the money and the market. Faster than the RX 580 and RX 590, priced like a cheap 590 or average 580, less power draw, runs cooler, includes Nvidias (frankly) superior software and drivers. So right now either the GTX1070 used, or the GTX 1660 new, 1070 should be about the same price even used. Only cheaper ones I found were crypto mining cards and F that noise.

    There are some technology differences but idk, you guys don't seem to go into great detail about the differences between GTX 1070 and GTX 1660 excluding game performance. Are there any notable DX features included in the newer card or is it just straight performance improvement?
  • Hrel - Saturday, March 30, 2019 - link

    I think a year or so from now I'll pick one of these up, either 1660 or ti, will depend on then current pricing.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now