Civilization: Beyond Earth

Shifting gears from action to strategy, we have Civilization: Beyond Earth, the latest in the Civilization series of strategy games. Civilization is not quite as GPU-demanding as some of our action games, but at Ultra quality it can still pose a challenge for even high-end video cards. Meanwhile as the first Mantle-enabled strategy title Civilization gives us an interesting look into low-level API performance on larger scale games, along with a look at developer Firaxis’s interesting use of split frame rendering with Mantle to reduce latency rather than improving framerates.

Civilization: Beyond Earth - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Civilization: Beyond Earth - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

As one of the few games that can hit 60fps on the R9 Fury at 4K with everything turned up, it’s interesting to see how resolution impacts all of our cards with Civilization. At 4K the R9 Fury is well ahead of the GTX 980, surpassing it by 17%. Yet at 1440p that lead becomes a very slight loss, with the Sapphire Tri-X R9 Fury’s mild factory overclock giving it just enough of a boost to stay ahead of the GTX 980.

Meanwhile the Fury/Fury X gap widens ever so slightly here. The R9 Fury is now a full 10% behind the full-fledged Fury.

Civilization: Beyond Earth - Min. Frame Rate - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Civilization: Beyond Earth - Min. Frame Rate - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

The minimum framerate situation for Civilization is very nearly a mirror of the averages. The R9 Fury does relatively well at 4K, but at 1440p it’s now neck-and-neck with the GTX 980 once again.

Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor Dragon Age: Inquisition
Comments Locked

288 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link

    2% cost difference is likely to be erased by sale pricing at various times.
  • darkfalz - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link

    My 980 is about 15% from stock, and it's a poor overclocker despite running cool. These cards struggle to hit 10%. I also can't go back 6 months ago and buy a R9 Fury. And Nvidia's next release is likely around the corner. I think they're approximately equal value - which is good for AMD fans, but it's been a long wait for them to have a card comparable to what NVIDIA enthusiasts have been enjoying for a year!
  • Flunk - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link

    It's nice to see AMD win a segment. I'm not sure that the Fury X matters that much in the grand scheme of things, seeing that it's the same price as the better performing Geforce 980 TI.

    The Fury seems to overclock to almost match the Fury X, making it a good enthusiast buy.
  • cmikeh2 - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link

    If you're willing to over clock though, you can get a good 15+ percent out of the 980 and pretty much bring it even with an OCed Fury for a little less money.
  • looncraz - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link

    But as soon as voltage control is unlocked the fury will probably eek out at least another 100MHz or more, which will put it healthily out of reach of the 980. And, once a few more driver issues (such as GTA V performance) the performance of the Fury will improve even more.

    HBM has a different performance profile, and AMD is still accommodating that. And, of course, if you turn the nVidia image quality up to AMD levels, nVidia loses a few extra percent of performance.

    The GTX 980 vs R9 Fury question is easy to answer (until a 980 price drop). The Fury X vs 980 Ti question is slightly more difficult (but the answer tends to go the other way, the AIO cooler being the Fury X's main draw).
  • D. Lister - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link

    "if you turn the nVidia image quality up to AMD levels, nVidia loses a few extra percent of performance."

    Surely we have some proof to go along with that allegation... ?
  • silverblue - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link

    I've heard the same thing, although I believe it was concerning the lack of anisotropic filtering on the NVIDIA side. However, anisotropic filtering is very cheap nowadays as far as I'm aware, so it's not really going to shake things up much whether it's on OR off, though image quality does improve noticeably.
  • D. Lister - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link

    Err...

    http://international.download.nvidia.com/webassets...

    You mean to say that it doesn't work like it is supposed to?
  • silverblue - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link

    I'm not sure what you're getting at. In any case, I was trying to debunk the myth that turning off AF makes a real difference to performance.
  • FlushedBubblyJock - Wednesday, July 15, 2015 - link

    no, there's no proof, the proof of course is inside the raging gourd of the amd fanboy, never be unlocked by merely sane mortal beings.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now