Battlefield 1 (DX11)

Battlefield 1 returns from the 2017 benchmark suite, the 2017 benchmark suite with a bang as DICE brought gamers the long-awaited AAA World War 1 shooter a little over a year ago. With detailed maps, environmental effects, and pacy combat, Battlefield 1 provides a generally well-optimized yet demanding graphics workload. The next Battlefield game from DICE, Battlefield V, completes the nostalgia circuit with a return to World War 2, but more importantly for us, is one of the flagship titles for GeForce RTX real time ray tracing.

We use the Ultra preset is used with no alterations. As these benchmarks are from single player mode, our rule of thumb with multiplayer performance still applies: multiplayer framerates generally dip to half our single player framerates. Battlefield 1 also supports HDR (HDR10, Dolby Vision).

Battlefield 1 - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 1 - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 1 - 1920x1080 - Ultra Quality

Our previous experience with Battlefield 1 shows that AMD hardware tend to do relatively well here, and the Radeon VII is no exception. Of the games in our suite, Battlefield 1 is actually only one of two games where the Radeon VII takes the lead over the RTX 2080, but nevertheless this is still a feather in its cap. The uplift over the Vega 64 is an impressive 34% at 4K, more than enough to solidly mark its position at the tier above. In turn, Battlefield 1 sees the Radeon VII meaningfully faster than the GTX 1080 Ti FE, something that the RTX 2080 needed the Founders Edition tweaks for.

Battlefield 1 - 99th Percentile - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 1 - 99th Percentile - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Battlefield 1 - 99th Percentile - 1920x1080 - Ultra Quality

99th percentiles reflect the same story, and at 1080p the CPU bottleneck plays more of a role than slight differences of the top three cards.

The Test Far Cry 5
POST A COMMENT

293 Comments

View All Comments

  • i4mt3hwin - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    So FP64 is 1:4 and not 1:8 or 1:2 as previously known? Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    Yep, looks like they changed the cap in vBIOS based on feedback.

    Which also means they could have uncapped it, but it's still cool that they did that.
    Reply
  • Ganimoth - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    Does that mean it could be potentially unlocked by some bios mod? Reply
  • tipoo - Friday, February 08, 2019 - link

    I hope so! Reply
  • Hul8 - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    I don't think it was ever reported or assumed to be 1/2 - that best possible ratio is only for the pro MI50 part. Early reports said 1/16. Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    For what it's worth, when we first asked AMD about it back at CES, FP64 performance wasn't among the features they were even throttling/holding back on. So for a time, 1/2 was on the table. Reply
  • GreenReaper - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    So it was *your* fault! ;-p Reply
  • BigMamaInHouse - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    Asrock just posted vBios: is this with the FP 1:4 or newer?
    https://www.asrock.com/Graphics-Card/AMD/Phantom%2...
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 07, 2019 - link

    We're not currently aware of any Radeon VII cards shipping with anything other than 1/4 rate FP64. Reply
  • BigMamaInHouse - Friday, February 08, 2019 - link

    So maybe it's new bios with some fixes?
    Did you tried it since all cards are the same reference design?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now