Battlefield 4

Kicking off our benchmark suite is Battlefield 4, DICE’s 2013 multiplayer military shooter. After a rocky start, Battlefield 4 has since become a challenging game in its own right and a showcase title for low-level graphics APIs. 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 - Ultra Quality - 0x MSAA

Battlefield 4 - 3840x2160 - Medium Quality

Battlefield 4 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 4 is going to set the pace for the rest of this review. In our introduction we talked about how the GTX 980 Ti may as well be the GTX Titan X, and this is one such example why. With a framerate deficit of no more than 3% in this benchmark, the difference between the two cards is just outside the range of standard run-to-run experimental variation that we see in our benchmarking process. So yes, it really is that fast.

In any case, after stripping away the Frostbite engine’s expensive (and not wholly effective) MSAA, what we’re left with for BF4 at 4K with Ultra quality puts the 980 Ti in a pretty good light. At 56.5fps it’s not quite up to the 60fps mark, but it comes very close, close enough that the GTX 980 Ti should be able to stay above 30fps virtually the entire time, and never drop too far below 30fps in even the worst case scenario. Alternatively, dropping to Medium quality should give the card plenty of headroom, with an average framerate of 91.8fps meaning even the lowest framerate never drops below 45fps.

Meanwhile our other significant comparison here is the GTX 980, which just saw its price cut by $50 to $499 to make room for the GTX 980 Ti. At $649 the GTX 980 Ti ideally should be 30% faster to justify its 30% higher price tag; here it’s almost exactly on that mark, fluctuating between a 28% and 32% lead depending on the resolution and settings.

Finally, shifting gears for a moment, gamers looking for the ultimate 1440p card will not be disappointed. GTX 980 Ti will not get to 120fps here (it won’t even come close), but at 77.7fps it’s well suited for driving 1440p144 displays. In fact and GTX Titan X are the single-GPU cards to do better than 60fps at this resolution.

NVIDIA's Computex Announcements & The Test Crysis 3
Comments Locked

290 Comments

View All Comments

  • przemo_li - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    Fiji is NOT gpu name.

    Its gpu segment name.

    Just like VI, SI, and some more.

    Its chip name if anything.

    If we for a moment switched to CPU-speak, You just claimed that Puma is single CPU from AMD ;)
  • Refuge - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    It is the name of a GPU Architecture. Which could be a one run chip, or it could have multiple versions based on binning.
  • dragonsqrrl - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    It's not a GPU architecture. GCN is a GPU architecture, Maxwell is a GPU architecture. Fiji is a GPU, GM204 is a GPU. This isn't exactly a new paradigm we're dealing with here. Oh dear, I think I might be telling someone something (aka trolling***). I've done it again.
  • dragonsqrrl - Wednesday, June 3, 2015 - link

    First, that's a terrible analogy. Puma is not a CPU, it's a CPU architecture, successor to Jaguar. Fiji is a GPU, I never once assumed or suggested that there will be a single Fiji SKU (that was all you), right now it's likely there will be 2 for the consumer market.

    I'm honestly not sure what you meant by "segment", perhaps you could clarify? Are you talking about AMD's XT/PRO convention? They're still the same GPU, pro is typically just a harvested XT.
  • Refuge - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    They released more than four if you include mobile GPU's I believe it goes up 2 more to 6.
  • dragonsqrrl - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    What do you mean mobile GPU's? Are you talking about the 900m series? There are no mobile specific GPU's in that lineup. It's all binned GM204 and GM107 SKU's.
  • eanazag - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link

    Interesting observation. I see the same behavior, but the situations are different. Both major graphics vendors are stuck on 28 nm. The 285 is a new product. AMD's graphic situation is not even close to the same as CPU. They are not even competitive in most of the markets for CPU. AMD will likely release a very competitive GPU, which is why NV is releasing the Ti now.
  • dragonsqrrl - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link

    Yes, the 285 is a new product, and while it is an improvement and a step in the right direction, Tonga just isn't enough to address the issue of AMD's profit margins this coming generation, or make them anymore competitive in mobile (M295X). It would be as though Nvidia were selling the 980 at the $200 price point. Not exactly, but from a memory interface, die size, PCB complexity, power consumption perspective, that's basically what AMD is doing right now, with no solution forthcoming. But I guess it's better than selling Tahiti for $200.

    "AMD's graphic situation is not even close to the same as CPU. They are not even competitive in most of the markets for CPU. AMD will likely release a very competitive GPU, which is why NV is releasing the Ti now."
    Some might argue they aren't competitive in the dGPU market with Nvidia market share approaching 80%... some might say that's like Intel levels of dominance...
    And I didn't say it's the same as their CPU situation, I said it's becoming more similar. While AMD will likely be competitive in raw performance, as I've tried to explain in my past 2 comments, that's kind of besides the point.
  • chizow - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link

    Yes, both are stuck on 28nm, but only Nvidia came out with a comprehensive ASIC line-up knowing we'd be stuck here for another 2 years (going back to 2H 2014). It is obvious now that AMD's cost-cutting in staff and R&D is starting to manifest itself as they simply can't keep up while losing ground on 2 fronts (CPU and GPU).

    The culmination of this will be AMD going to market with a full series of rebrands of mostly old parts going back to 2011 with a single new ASIC at the top of their stack, while Nvidia has fully laid out its arsenal with GM107 (1 SKU), GM206 (1 SKU), GM204 (2 SKU), and now GM200 (2 SKU).
  • Kevin G - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link

    Is it unprecedented? I recall the Geforce 9000, GTS 100 and most of the GTX 200 series being various rebrands from 'generation' to 'generation'. In fact, the 8800GTS 512 MB, 9800GTX, GTS 150 and GTS 250 were all the same chip design (the GTS 250 had a die shrink but was functionally unchanged).

    nVidia has gotten better since then, well with the exception of the GF108 that plagued the low end for far too long.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now