Battlefield 4

Our latest addition to our benchmark suite and our current major multiplayer action game of our benchmark suite is Battlefield 4, DICE’s 2013 multiplayer military shooter. After a rocky start, Battlefield 4 has finally reached a point where it’s stable enough for benchmark use, giving us the ability to profile one of the most popular and strenuous shooters out there. As these benchmarks are from single player mode, based on our experiences our rule of thumb here is that multiplayer framerates will dip to half our single player framerates, which means a card needs to be able to average at least 60fps if it’s to be able to hold up in multiplayer.

Battlefield 4 - 3840x2160 - Medium Quality

Battlefield 4 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 4 - 1920x1080 - Ultra Quality

In Battlefield 4 resolution makes all the difference. AMD’s 4K advantage is in full force here, while that solid lead errodes and the GTX 970 catches up for 1440p and 1080p..

Looking at just the NVIDIA lineup for a second, while not even GTX 980 was able to cross 60fps at 1440p, it does prove that its 17% performance advantage counts for something by being able to push framerates in the high 50s, all while GTX 970 can’t even crack 50fps. EVGA’s FTW overclock will get you there though, and for that matter it can even cross the 60fps mark at 4K.

Bioshock Infinite Crysis 3
POST A COMMENT

155 Comments

View All Comments

  • vred - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    Memory chips don't really need heatsinks, but memory VRMs do - so if overclocking memory, you have to watch their temperature and take care of their proper cooling. Reply
  • eanazag - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    I am happy to see both Nvidia cards come out packing heat. for once Nvidia isn't totally price gouging at launch. In fact, we should see AMD prices come down soon as AMD reviews Nvidia's sales numbers. The 290 and 290X are pushing like 10 months on the clock at pretty much launch prices. it is about time we the price have a reason to come down. The 970 is the card to do so.

    Assumedly, Nvidia already has the 980 TI taped out for AMDs next response card. I am disappointed to see that there is no builtin audio decoder like in AMD. It means little hope to see many developers leveraging audio hardware to reduce CPU load in games with 5.1+ situations.
    Reply
  • JlHADJOE - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    I doubt we'll see a 980Ti. Like the 680 before it, the 980 is already a fully enabled chip. Reply
  • Kraelic - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    It is a GM204 upper-midrange chip as were any Gxx04 chips before... this is like the launch of the 680 and 670 GK104 cards, then in the refresh 770 and 760 used those same chips when the 780 GK110 high end came out with the true flagship core.

    There will be a GM210 flagship taking the titan and x80 name, and the GM204 will go into the x70 and x60 cards at a lower price and this refresh is what I am interested in.
    Reply
  • randomhkkid - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    However like the 780 before it is is also a Gxx04 chip so therefore there will be a Gxx10 chip above it suited to cards like the 980ti as was the case with the 780ti. Reply
  • randomhkkid - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    beaten to it ;) Reply
  • Samus - Sunday, September 28, 2014 - link

    we'll probably see a 980Ti in the form of a 20nm part. even if there is no architectural difference they could tweak it for a smaller process while possibly boosting the clock. who knows...1500MHz GPU & 8GHz GDDR5? Reply
  • squngy - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    I'm not up to date, but if crypto-currency miners are still interested in radeon cards AMD might not rush to lower the price, or if they do the retailers will just pocket the difference and sell at the same price. Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    A 10% OC won't heat a chip to the point of damage. You will most likely first reach the point when the memory fails to function.

    Btw Ryan, you keep saying it's "clocked at 7GHz" but I don't think that's true. Probably need to add the word "effective". Is the real clock 1/2 or 1/4 that?
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    You'll frequently see 1/4 in OC tools. In the end it doesn't matter, both numbers are valid: one is the frequency of the data on the bus (the high marketing number) and the other one is the frequency of the memory chips. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now