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

  • AkibWasi - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    ain't those 896(64 per SMM) yellow colored boxes in Titan's diagram indicate FP64 cores ??? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    Correct. NVIDIA only includes those cores on diagrams for their compute/pro GPUs. Reply
  • dexgen - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    I think it would be a great idea to comment on and analyze the effects of overclocking (extra OC through AB or PX) when even the non overclocked settings end up getting throttled.

    For me, the most important thing about overclocking when the card is factory overclocked already is how much the throttling changes when the power target is increased. Any comments, Mr. Smith?
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    Increasing the power target helps, but it does not fully alleviate the issue. A 10% increase just isn't enough to eliminate all TDP throttling, thanks in big part to the fact that power consumption grows with the square of the voltage. GM204 would ideally like quite a bit of power to sustain a heavy workload at 1.243v. Which is why that's officially in boost territory, as NVIDIA only intends that voltage/bin to be sustained in light workloads. Reply
  • Alexvrb - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    Wow I figured that the 970 would run into far less issues sustaining max boost than the 980. But I guess it is drawing nearly as much power. I don't want to see anyone complaining about AMD cards and boost anymore, heh.

    Anyway, the 970 still provides the absolute best bang for the buck and I'm stunned they didn't price it at $400. It's fast, reasonably priced, runs cool and quiet. It also is easy on power requirements, though I always overbuy on PSU anyway for headroom. Easy recommendation for anyone buying in the this price range!
    Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    Square of voltage, what are you smoking? P = IV = I^2 R = V^2 /R. The IC isn't a resistor. Typically current stays close to the same as you increase supply voltage. Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    The formula for dynamic power consumption:

    P = C * V^2 * f

    Where C is capacitance, f is frequency, and V is voltage. Those high boost bins are very expensive from a power standpoint.
    Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Sunday, September 28, 2014 - link

    You're right, thanks! Thinking about it, dynamic power increases by the square, and static is by a direct proportion, so total should be between the two. Dynamic probably dominates so it's probably much closer to the square. Reply
  • Footman36 - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    What really bothers me is that EVGA is getting lazy, reusing older pcb's. This one looks like a 760... The VRM and phases look very primitive next to a card like the Asus Strix GTX 970. There was a time when EVGA used to wow me with custom designs, the last few years not so much as they invariably use reference boards. the issue I have with most of the reference boards is that coil buzz is noticeable. The Asus and MSI boards are using custom digital VRM's and super alloy caps....
    Anyhow, nice review.
    Reply
  • Iketh - Monday, September 29, 2014 - link

    i'm sure it has to do with their big heat sink design + bracing so the card doesn't flex Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now