Gaming 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.

Gaming Tests: Final Fantasy XIV Gaming Tests: World of Tanks
Comments Locked

339 Comments

View All Comments

  • Qasar - Tuesday, November 10, 2020 - link

    simple. if intel/nvidia does it, its ok, and accepted. but if amd does it ? its a crime, and becomes important.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, November 12, 2020 - link

    The leectrical costs from running intel VS amd add up to literal cents per month. If you are that concerned....you shouldnt be buying $500 CPUs.

    Cost of ownership really only matters, similarly, on cheap low end cars. People buying $100K+ mercedes are not particularly concerned about the price of parts or fuel, if they were they wouldnt be buying a $100K car.
  • Threska - Monday, November 16, 2020 - link

    Funny thing my APC UPS keeps track of something like that for things plugged it. Only thing that demonstrates is that everything costs, even FUN.
  • Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    Only if you totally ignore performance per watt... You need a cooler capable of dissipating up to 250W to hit that performance, and even then, your characterisation here is garbage. Overall the 5800X is a superior product for the same price, and it's only just been released.

    Let the shitty, bitter takes continue!
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    And when Intel held the performance crown, they priced their parts higher than the competition. This is to be expected. AMD only undercut on price because they couldn't compete on performance previously.
  • LithiumFirefly - Friday, November 6, 2020 - link

    They didn't just price their parts higher for nearly 25 years they just slapped $1,000 price tag on their top chip didn't matter what its performance was $1,000 that's what it was.
  • just4U - Thursday, November 5, 2020 - link

    the 5900X is nice at it's price point @ only 3-10 bucks more than the 10900K which appears to be what it's competing with.. and all the 10core parts really. The 5800X is in a odd position.. and I doubt it's going to be all that popular at that price point.
  • Spunjji - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    5600 and 5700 non-X will be where it's at for value when they roll around.
  • just4U - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    Yeah I agree.. plus it's likely that prices will come down on these parts somewhat or be offered on sale or bundled..(saw a bit of that on launch day but they all sold out so whatever)
  • bananaforscale - Monday, November 9, 2020 - link

    "Value destroying price hike"? Sure for 3600 vs 5600X (which is *arguably* comparable), 3900X vs 5900X there's no contest. 5900X is demonstrably more than 10% faster is most cases. FWIW, I'd go for the 5800X over 10900K performance being equal because PCIe 4 and lower power draw.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now