GRID 2

The final game in our benchmark suite is also our racing entry, Codemasters’ GRID 2. Codemasters continues to set the bar for graphical fidelity in racing games, and with GRID 2 they’ve gone back to racing on the pavement, bringing to life cities and highways alike. Based on their in-house EGO engine, GRID 2 includes a DirectCompute based advanced lighting system in its highest quality settings, which incurs a significant performance penalty but does a good job of emulating more realistic lighting within the game world.

GRID 2 - 3840x2160 - Maximum Quality + 4x MSAA

GRID 2 - 2560x1440 - Maximum Quality + 4x MSAA

GRID 2 - 1920x1080 - Maximum Quality + 4x MSAA

Our final game is another solid victory for the GTX 980. The GTX 980’s lead does shrink at 4K, otherwise we’re looking at a 12% advantage over the GTX 780 Ti and 14-23% over R9 290XU.

144Hz gamers will find 1080p quite useful, with the GTX 980 coming just short of averaging a matching framerate. Otherwise for 2560p one would need to settle for 101fps. Though for 4K gamers, even a single GTX 980 is more or less enough here; 53fps at 4K with Maximum quality and 4x MSAA means that at most a drop to 2x MSAA would get it above 60fps without involving a second card. Maybe this is a good case for NVIDIA’s new Multi-Frame sampled Anti-Aliasing?

GRID 2 - Delta Percentages

GRID 2 - Surround/4K - Delta Percentages

Our last set of delta percentages once again finds the GTX 980 easily below 3%. Though the variance is higher than with the other two cards, and by more than just what we would expect as a result of higher average framerates.

Thief Synthetics
Comments Locked

274 Comments

View All Comments

  • jmunjr - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Wish you had done a GTX 970 review as well like many other sites since way more of us care about that card than the 980 since it is cheaper.
  • Gonemad - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Apparently, if I want to run anything under the sun in 1080p cranked to full at 60fps, I will need to get me one GTX 980 and a suitable system to run with it, and forget mid-ranged priced cards.

    That should put an huge hole in my wallet.

    Oh yes, the others can run stuff at 1080p, but you have to keep tweaking drivers, turning AA on, turning AA off, what a chore. And the milennar joke, yes it RUNS Crysis, at the resolution I'd like.

    Didn't, by any chance, the card actually benefit of being fabricated at 28nm, by spreading its heat over a larger area? If the whole thing, hipothetically, just shrunk to 14nm, wouldn't all that 165W of power would be dissipated over a smaller area (1/4 area?), and this thing would hit the throttle and stay there?

    Or by being made smaller, it would actually dissipate even less heat and still get faster?
  • Yojimbo - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I think that it depends on the process. If Dennard scaling were to be in effect, then it should dissipate proportionally less heat. But to my understanding, Dennard scaling has broken down somewhat in recent years, and so I think heat density could be a concern. However, I don't know if it would be accurate to say that the chip benefited from the 28nm process, since I think it was originally designed with the 20nm process in mind, and the problem with putting the chip on that process had to do with the cost and yields. So, presumably, the heat dissipation issues were already worked out for that process..?
  • AnnonymousCoward - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    The die size doesn't really matter for heat dissipation when the external heat sink is the same size; the thermal resistance from die to heat sink would be similar.
  • danjw - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I would love to see these built on Intel's 14nm process or even the 22nm. I think both Nvidia and AMD aren't comfortable letting Intel look at their technology, despite NDAs and firewalls that would be a part of any such agreement.

    Anyway, thanks for the great review Ryan.
  • Yojimbo - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Well, if one goes by Jen-Hsun Huang's (Nvidia's CEO) comments of a year or two ago, Nvidia would have liked Intel to manufacture their SOCs for them, but it seems Intel was unwilling. I don't see why they would be willing to have them manufacture SOCs and not GPUs being that at that time they must have already had the plan to put their desktop GPU technology into their SOCs, unless the one year delay between the parts makes a difference.
  • r13j13r13 - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    hasta que no salga la serie 300 de AMD con soporte nativo para directx 12
  • Arakageeta - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    No interpretation of the compute graphs whatsoever? Could you at least report the output of CUDA's deviceQuery tool?
  • texasti89 - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I'm truly impressed with this new line of GPUs. To be able to acheive this leap on efficiency using the same transistor feature size is a great incremental achievement. Bravo TSMC & Nvidia. I feel comfortable to think that we will soon get this amazing 980 performance level on game laptops once we scale technology to the 10nm process. Keep up the great work.
  • stateofstatic - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Spoiler alert: Intel is building a new fab in Hillsboro, OR specifically for this purpose...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now