Gaming Tests: Final Fantasy XIV

Despite being one number less than Final Fantasy 15, because FF14 is a massively-multiplayer online title, there are always yearly update packages which give the opportunity for graphical updates too. In 2019, FFXIV launched its Shadowbringers expansion, and an official standalone benchmark was released at the same time for users to understand what level of performance they could expect. Much like the FF15 benchmark we’ve been using for a while, this test is a long 7-minute scene of simulated gameplay within the title. There are a number of interesting graphical features, and it certainly looks more like a 2019 title than a 2010 release, which is when FF14 first came out.

With this being a standalone benchmark, we do not have to worry about updates, and the idea for these sort of tests for end-users is to keep the code base consistent. For our testing suite, we are using the following settings:

  • 768p Minimum, 1440p Minimum, 4K Minimum, 1080p Maximum

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

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

Gaming Tests: Deus Ex Mankind Divided Gaming Tests: Final Fantasy XV
Comments Locked

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.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now