AMD Zen 3 Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 5950X, 5900X, 5800X and 5600X Tested
by Dr. Ian Cutress on November 5, 2020 9:01 AM ESTGaming Tests: Final Fantasy XV
Upon arriving to PC, Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition was given a graphical overhaul as it was ported over from console. As a fantasy RPG with a long history, the fruits of Square-Enix’s successful partnership with NVIDIA are on display. The game uses the internal Luminous Engine, and as with other Final Fantasy games, pushes the imagination of what we can do with the hardware underneath us. To that end, FFXV was one of the first games to promote the use of ‘video game landscape photography’, due in part to the extensive detail even at long range but also with the integration of NVIDIA’s Ansel software, that allowed for super-resolution imagery and post-processing effects to be applied.
In preparation for the launch of the game, Square Enix opted to release a standalone benchmark. Using the Final Fantasy XV standalone benchmark gives us a lengthy standardized sequence to record, although it should be noted that its heavy use of NVIDIA technology means that the Maximum setting has problems - it renders items off screen. To get around this, we use the standard preset which does not have these issues. We use the following settings:
- 720p Standard, 1080p Standard, 4K Standard, 8K Standard
For automation, the title accepts command line inputs for both resolution and settings, and then auto-quits when finished. As with the other benchmarks, we do as many runs until 10 minutes per resolution/setting combination has passed, and then take averages. Realistically, because of the length of this test, this equates to two runs per setting.
| AnandTech | Low Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Low Quality |
High Resolution Low Quality |
Medium Resolution Max Quality |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
 |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
 |
 |
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
339 Comments
View All Comments
Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
IO die is the same between all of them - they probably just haven't churned enough chiplets out yet. Those top-end chips probably need a high bin to reach their intended clocks and power levels, too.lmcd - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link
That seems like a mistake then -- should've released a 5890 and 5940 with lower clocks. At some point professionals are buying for IPC, thread count, and base clock speed.Qasar - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link
how is that a mistake ? if no need to change the IO die yet, why change anything ?Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
On launch? Not really.If they're still unavailable a month or two from now, I'll be greatly disappointed.
Machinus - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
Looks like a great set of chips for anyone who gets one mailed to them directly from AMD.Good luck buying one in a store.
danbob999 - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
480p Low quality gaming benchmarks? Really? Someone really play Civ6 with those settings?What's the point? Who cares if CPU X has 454 fps while Y only does 322?
Hxx - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
those are unrealistic scenarios just to showcase the IPC gains over prev gen and competition. But yeah normally you would pick the resolution you are playing at and go from there. In this case at 1080p / 1440p it trades blows with Intel in most titles.silverblue - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
I'm not sure why the test revolves around frame rate, and not turn time. To use Gamers Nexus as a source, the 5950X completes a turn in 26.6 seconds, whereas the 10900K does it in 30.9 (29.3 OC to 5.2GHz), and the 3950X in 32.4. So, in this one test, the 10900K takes 16% longer, and the 3950X 22%.Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link
Yeah, I was a bit confused by not seeing turn times for Civ as that's the really big drag in late game scenarios.ExarKun333 - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link
Zen 3 feels a lot lot Core 2 ~ 14 years ago. Wow, very impressive.