Our 2015 GPU Benchmark Suite

Also kicking off alongside GTX Titan X today will be the first article to use our new 2015 GPU benchmark suite.

For 2015 we have upgraded or replaced most of our games, retiring several long-time titles including Bioshock: Infinite, Metro, and our last DirectX 10 game, Crysis Warhead. Our returning titles are Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3, the former of which is still a popular MP title to this day, and the latter continuing to pulverize GPUs well before we hit its highest settings.

Joining these 2 games are 7 new titles. Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor and Far Cry 4 are our new action/shooter games, while Dragon Age: Inquisition rides the line between an action game and an RPG. Meanwhile for strategy games we have Civilization: Beyond Earth and Total War: Attila, these two games representing the latest entries in their respective series. Rounding out our collection is GRID Autosport, the latest GRID game from Codemasters, and the unique first person puzzle/exploration game The Talos Principle from Croteam.

AnandTech GPU Bench 2015 Game List
Game Genre API(s)
Battlefield 4 FPS DX11 + Mantle
Crysis 3 FPS DX11
Shadow of Mordor Action/Open World DX11
Civilization: Beyond Earth Strategy DX11 + Mantle
Dragon Age: Inquisition RPG DX11 + Mantle
The Talos Principle First Person Puzzle DX11
Far Cry 4 FPS DX11
Total War: Attila Strategy DX11
GRID Autosport Racing DX11

With new low-level APIs ramping up in 2015, we’re going to be paying particular attention to APIs starting this year, as everyone is interested in seeing what Vulkan (née Mantle) and DirectX 12 can do. Unless otherwise noted, going forward all benchmarks will be using low-level APIs when available, meaning DX12/Vulkan/Mantle when possible.

Meanwhile from a design standpoint our benchmark settings remain unchanged. For lower-end cards we’ll look at 1080p at various quality settings when practical, and for high-end cards we’ll be looking at 1080p and above at the highest quality settings. The one exception to this is 4K, which at 2.25x the resolution of 1440p remains difficult to hit playable framerates, in which case we’ll also include a lower quality setting to showcase what kind of quality hit it takes to make 4K playable on current video cards.

The Test

As for our hardware testbed, it remains unchanged from 2014, being composed of an overclocked Core i7-4960X hosed in an NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition case.

CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200i
Hard Disk: Samsung SSD 840 EVO (750GB)
Memory: G.Skill RipjawZ DDR3-1866 4 x 8GB (9-10-9-26)
Case: NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition
Monitor: Asus PQ321
Video Cards: AMD Radeon R9 295X2
AMD Radeon R9 290X
AMD Radeon HD 7990
NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
Video Drivers: NVIDIA Release 347.84 Beta
AMD Catalyst Cat 15.3 Beta
OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
Meet The GeForce GTX Titan X Battlefield 4
Comments Locked

276 Comments

View All Comments

  • BurnItDwn - Wednesday, March 18, 2015 - link

    So its like 50% faster vs a R9 290, but costs 3x as much ... awesome card, but expensive.
  • uber_national - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    I think there's something strange going on in your benchmark if the 7990 is only 3 fps slower than the 295x2 in the 2560x1440 chart...
  • Samus - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    "Unlike the GTX 980 then, for this reason NVIDIA is once again back to skipping the backplate, leaving the back side of the card bare just as with the previous GTX Titan cards."

    Don't you mean "again back to SHIPPING the backplate?"

    I'm confused as the article doesn't show any pictures of the back of the card. Does it have a backplate or not?
  • xchaotic - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    Nope. A $999 card and it doesn't have a backplate. This is possibly due to easier cooling in SLI configs
  • Antronman - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    It's a blower cooler. So everything goes out the side of the case, which can be desirable if you have cards right on top of each other as the airflow is unobstructed.

    It's just Nvidia. Unless you need PhysX, you're much better off waiting for the R300s.
  • Mikmike86 - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    Spring pricing is a bit off.
    R9 290x's go below $300 after rebates quite often now, Febuary I picked up a 290x for about $240 after rebate which was the lowest but have seen several at or below $300 without a rebate.
    R9 290s run around $250 and have gone down to $200-$220 recently as a low.
    970s have been hovering around $320 but have gone to $290-$300.

    Otherwise the Titan X was more for marketing since the 290x (2yr old tech) claws at the 980 at 4k and the 970 falls on it's face at 4k.
    This cards a beast don't get me wrong especially when it chases the 295x2 after overclocking, but when you can get a 295x2 for $600 after rebates a couples times a month it just doesn't make sense.
    $800 and I could see these selling like hotcakes and they'd still pocket a solid chunk, probably just going to drop a 980ti in a few months after the 390x is released making these 2nd place cards like they did with the og Titans

    I go back and forth between Nvidia and AMD but Nvidia has been extra sketchy recently with their drivers and of course the 970.
  • Refuge - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    I just dont' appreciate their price premiums.

    I've been a fan of Green Team since i was a young boy, but anymore I usually lean Red team.

    Just not satisfied with what I'm paying over on the other side to be honest.

    Yes when I'm on the Red side I don't always have the same peak performance as Green. But I had enough money afterwards to pay my car payment and take the old lady out to dinner still. ;)
  • sna1970 - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    Nvidia intentionaly made GTX 970 only 4G of ram ... why ? so no one use them in 4K for cheap SLI.

    I hate nvidia ways.

    imagine 3x GTX 970 in SLI for only $900 (300 each)
    or 2x GTX 970 , which will be slightly faster than Titan X for $600

    but noooooooooo, nvidia will never allow 8G GTX 970 , keep it at 4G so people buy Titan X ...

    disgusting . AMD wake up .. we need competition.
  • medi03 - Thursday, March 26, 2015 - link

    There is R9 290x available for nearly half of 980's price, being only 5-15% slower. (and 300w vs 370w total power consumption, I'm sure you can live with it)

    There is R9 295x2 which handily beats Titan X in all performance benchmarks, with power consumption being the only donwside.
  • Railgun - Thursday, March 19, 2015 - link

    @Ryan Smith. For future reviews, as you briefly touched on it with this one, especially at high resolutions, can you start providing how much VRAM is actually in use with each game? For cards such as this, I'd like to see whether 12GB is actually useful, or pointless at this point. Based on the review and some of the results, it's pointless at the moment, even at 4K.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now