Far Cry 4

The next game in our 2015 GPU benchmark suite is Far Cry 4, Ubisoft’s Himalayan action game. A lot like Crysis 3, Far Cry 4 can be quite tough on GPUs, especially with Ultra settings thanks to the game’s expansive environments.

Far Cry 4 - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Far Cry 4 - 3840x2160 - Medum Quality

Far Cry 4 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

At 4K Ultra this happens to be another case where the GTX Titan X delivers framerates around 40fps, in this case coming in at 42.1fps. To get a single-GPU card up to 60fps we need to drop to Medium settings, which gets the GTX Titan X to 60.5 at a fairly significant hit to image quality.

Compared to NVIDIA’s other high-end cards, Far Cry 4 puts the GTX Titan X in a very favorable light. Along with the customary 35% performance lead over the GTX 980 at 4K Ultra, the newest Titan beats the GTX 780 Ti and GTX Titan by 60% and 80% respectively, highlighting the architectural efficiency improvements in Maxwell. On the other hand the lead over the R9 290XU is only 29%, making it one of the smallest leads for the GTX Titan X and highlighting how as always AMD and NVIDIA’s relative performance shifts with the game in question.

Dropping down from 4K to 1440p, the GTX Titan X continues to do well, becoming the only single-GPU card to surpass 60fps even at this lower resolution.

The Talos Principle Total War: Attila
Comments Locked

276 Comments

View All Comments

  • FlushedBubblyJock - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    Wow, it's stomping all over 2 of AMDs best gpu's combined.
    It's a freaking monster.
  • cykodrone - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    I actually went to the trouble to make an account to say sometimes I come here just to read the comments, some of the convos have me rolling on the floor busting my guts laughing, seriously, this is free entertainment at its best! Aside from that, the cost of this Nvidia e-penis would feed 10 starving children for a month. I mean seriously, at what point is it overkill? By that I mean is there any game out there that would absolutely not run good enough on a slightly lesser card at half the price? When I read this card alone requires 250W, my eyes popped out of my head, holy electric bill batman, but I guess if somebody has a 1G to throw away on an e-penis, they don't have electric bill worries. One more question, what kind of CPU/motherboard would you need to back this sucker up? I think this card would be retarded without at least the latest i7 Extreme(ly overpriced), can you imagine some tool dropping this in an i3? What I'm saying is, this sucker would need an expensive 'bed' too, otherwise, you'd just be wasting your time and money.
  • sna1970 - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    What dual GTX 980 Anand ?

    for 2 x $300 Gtx 970 you will get the same or better performance than Titan X for $600 ONLY.

    almost same power as well.

    $1000 for this card is too much , Just tooooo much.
  • rolfaalto - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    So much silly complaining about value. This is an incredible bargain for compute compared to Tesla -- absolutely crushes at single precision for a fraction of the price! For my application the new Titan X is the absolute best that money can buy, and it's comparatively cheap. So, I'll buy 10 of them, and 100 more if they work out.
  • rolfaalto - Saturday, March 21, 2015 - link

    ... and the 12GB is the deal maker, 6 GB on the previous Titans was way too little.
  • yiling cao - Sunday, March 22, 2015 - link

    for people using cuda, there is just no AMD option, Upgrading every nvidia new releases.
  • Antronman - Sunday, March 22, 2015 - link

    Or, if you're the kind of person who actually needs CUDA and isn't just using it because they made a mistake in choosing their software and just chose something with a bloated price tag and fancy webpage then you get a Quadro card instead of wasting your money on a Titan.

    You know. The sort of people who need Solidworks because they're working for a multimillion or even multibillion dollar corporation that wants 3D models or is using GPU computing, or if you're using Maya to animate a movie for a multimillion dollar studio.

    Even if you're an indie on a budget, you don't buy a Titan. Because you won't be using software with CUDA or special Nvidia optimization. Because you won't be using iRay.

    With the exception of industry applications (excluding individual/small businesses), Nvidia is currently just a choice for brand loyalists or people who want a big epeen.
  • r13j13r13 - Sunday, March 22, 2015 - link

    titan x vs R9 295x2
  • MyNuts - Sunday, March 22, 2015 - link

    Ill take 2 please
  • Xsjado Koncept - Sunday, March 22, 2015 - link

    Your "in-house project developed by our very own Dr. Ian Cutress" is garbage and is obviously not dividing workloads between multi-GPUs, a very simple task for any programmer with access to Google.

    It's plain as day to see, but gives NV the lead in another benchmark - was this the goal of such awful programming?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now