snapshot Posted February 29, 2016 And you thought NVidia was great . Pictures below Spoiler 0 Share this post Link to post
AirRaid Posted February 29, 2016 I call at least a little bullshit on those numbers. I ran the alpha, on a GTX970 with a stock i5-2500K, and got solid 60FPS the entire time. Aside from anecdotal evidence, I wouldn't really put any faith in any benchmarks for unfinished code, especially when in virtually every other test at 4K the GTX Titan X and the 980Ti are whipping the 295X and the other top AMD cards. 0 Share this post Link to post
Archvile Hunter Posted February 29, 2016 From my personal experience, I can't trust any of the numbers in these charts. The GTX 780 is listed with an avg. fps of 35, but my supposedly weaker 760 never dipped below 50. I have no idea what they did to make DOOM run so poorly on these GPUs. 0 Share this post Link to post
Deatheye Posted February 29, 2016 that are one of the most implausible benchmarks I've ever seen 0 Share this post Link to post
Linguica Posted February 29, 2016 The original benchmarking article (in Russian) states that the game uses sparse voxel octrees for its rendering. Uh, lol? I know Carmack was experimenting with them at one point but I have never once heard that Doom 2016 actually uses them. 0 Share this post Link to post
MrDeAD1313 Posted February 29, 2016 These benchmarks seem off a good bit to me as well. I played on an r9 270x 2gb single card and got pretty solid results on the 1080p with aa maxed myself. Sometimes it may have dipped very slightly when there was an insane fight going on but for the most part i got a solid at LEAST 50fps. Seeing some of the better nvidia cards showing lower fps is strange to me. 0 Share this post Link to post
Ginsu Posted February 29, 2016 Like all new releases, the game will become better optimised with patches etc, so that will change. 0 Share this post Link to post
MiNaM Posted February 29, 2016 DMGUYDZ64 said:And you thought NVidia was great . Pictures below Spoiler http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/5/0/50737_06_amd-beats-nvidia-early-doom-benchmarks-dominating-4k_full.png http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/5/0/50737_07_amd-beats-nvidia-early-doom-benchmarks-dominating-4k_full.png http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/5/0/50737_08_amd-beats-nvidia-early-doom-benchmarks-dominating-4k_full.png I call bullshit, those benches aren't real.. here's my benchMiNaM said:Here are some benchmark results running Doom Alpha System specs: - intel Core i7 2700k 3.5Ghz @ stock clocks - 16GB DDR3 2400Mhz RAM - Asus Strix GTX 980 4GB @ stock clocks - Game runs from RAID0 HDDs SW: - CPU Load: CoreTemp max recorded - GPU Load: Asus GPU Tweak - FPS Benchmark: Fraps - Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit & nvidia geforce 361.75 whql drivers Map: Heatwave, 6v6 team deathmatch (1680*1050, No AA) CPU LOAD core#0 : 30% core#1 : 34% core#2 : 21% core#3 : 20% GPU LOAD min : 53% max : 99% FPS min : 55 max : 61 avg : 59,884 ----- (1680*1050, AA High "FXAA+TSSAA) CPU LOAD core#0 : 38% core#1 : 31% core#2 : 26% core#3 : 31% GPU LOAD min : 64% max : 99% FPS min : 48 max : 62 avg : 59,695 and will post 4K results soon... 0 Share this post Link to post
PsychoGoatee Posted February 29, 2016 My Geforce 560ti isn't even on there? It was so young and full of promise in 2012... =P (I pre-ordered Doom for PS4. Hopefully this game'll still be going strong by the time I put together my next PC) These benchmarks are pretty harsh really. My brother just got a GTX 970 4gb a few months ago, currently goes for $335 on Amazon. Not a cheap card. It averages 44 FPS at 1080p? Ouch. They announced that this game will be running at 1080p 60FPS on PS4 and Xbone, so I assume these benchmarks are on full settings. So at least you could get 60 FPS by turning down a couple settings I guess. Still, PC gaming is pricey these days, if can't even play this game full settings and get 60 FPS with a good relatively recent card. AirRaid said:I call at least a little bullshit on those numbers. I ran the alpha, on a GTX970 with a stock i5-2500K, and got solid 60FPS the entire time. Well that's cool. Though I'd figure the campaign is more taxing graphically than the multiplayer. Granted this article is based on the multiplayer alpha. 0 Share this post Link to post
AirRaid Posted March 1, 2016 Yeah any benchmark you see right now is based off the MP alpha. It's the only version of the game anyone who is doing benchmarks has. Your 970 will be fine, it's a really great card. 0 Share this post Link to post
PsychoGoatee Posted March 2, 2016 AirRaid said:Yeah any benchmark you see right now is based off the MP alpha. It's the only version of the game anyone who is doing benchmarks has. Your 970 will be fine, it's a really great card. That's my brother I mentioned, I have a 560ti. So PS4 for me for now. :D 0 Share this post Link to post
Rayziik Posted March 2, 2016 Lol, go figure that my 390X is the only new card they DON'T have a benchmark for. Although it should end up someone around the Fury X and 295X in terms of performance. Not at the PC so I can't look for it atm, but iirc the new AMD cards actually perform better at 4k than they do at 1080p because of something to do with memory(?) or something. 0 Share this post Link to post
Fluffles Posted March 2, 2016 PsychoGoatee said:That's my brother I mentioned, I have a 560ti. So PS4 for me for now. :D I'd still grab the PC version with that card, possibly play it at 720p res instead if you end up with problems. Even though it does state that a 660 is "minimum" you could easily get around it especially since a 660 is a pretty capable card for 1080p. I have one and it plays games like alien isolation at ultra 100-120fps 1080p. 0 Share this post Link to post
PsychoGoatee Posted March 2, 2016 Fluffles said:I'd still grab the PC version with that card, possibly play it at 720p res instead if you end up with problems. Even though it does state that a 660 is "minimum" you could easily get around it especially since a 660 is a pretty capable card for 1080p. I have one and it plays games like alien isolation at ultra 100-120fps 1080p. XCOM 2 for example I had to play on pretty low settings recently. My rig is from 2012, i5-2500k 3.30gz, etc. I'm sure I could play Doom on it, but I figure I'll play it on PS4 and play it again on PC with high settings in a couple years when I make my next PC. 0 Share this post Link to post
Almonds Posted March 2, 2016 DooM_RO said:These benchmarks are retarded. t-technology has feelings too 0 Share this post Link to post
hardcore_gamer Posted March 2, 2016 I also have a gtx 970, but the difference is that I am also using a 1440p monitor. Doubt I will get smooth 60fps on that res with full settings. It's kinda funny. I bought the monitor (with a huge discount I might add) cus I figured higher res=better graphics. But then I can't play most new games on full settings in-spite of having a very recent PC because it's too demanding at such a high res :/ 0 Share this post Link to post
Plasma Gun Posted March 3, 2016 PsychoGoatee said:XCOM 2 for example I had to play on pretty low settings recently. My rig is from 2012, i5-2500k 3.30gz, etc. I'm sure I could play Doom on it, but I figure I'll play it on PS4 and play it again on PC with high settings in a couple years when I make my next PC. Dude. The rest of your system is literally awesome; all you need in order to play Doom at solid settings is a $150 GTX 950. You can probably even get a few bucks by selling the 560. Consider doing that instead of forcing yourself to play the game on a console :-P EDIT: 560 Ti sells for like $60 on eBay, more than I had thought. Seriously, consider just upgrading your GPU. 0 Share this post Link to post
PsychoGoatee Posted March 3, 2016 Plasma Gun said:Dude. The rest of your system is literally awesome; all you need in order to play Doom at solid settings is a $150 GTX 950. You can probably even get a few bucks by selling the 560. Consider doing that instead of forcing yourself to play the game on a console :-P EDIT: 560 Ti sells for like $60 on eBay, more than I had thought. Seriously, consider just upgrading your GPU. You are tempting me, I guess my PC is closer to qualified than I figured. Though looking at the official page's alpha requirements: "Minimum Spec (720p) 64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8.1 Intel Core i5 @ 3.3 GHz or better / AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better 8 GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (2GB VRAM) / AMD Radeon HD 7870 (2GB VRAM) 6GB HDD space Steam account High speed internet connection *Please note that the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 680m and 860m models are below min spec for the DOOM Closed Alpha Recommended Spec (1080p) 64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8.1 Intel Core i7 @ 3.4GHz or better / AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0GHz or better 8GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 (3GB or more VRAM) / AMD Radeon R9 280 (3GB or more VRAM) 6GB HDD space Steam account High speed internet connection" I get the impression I'd be playing on lower settings or resolution, even if I spent 150-200 extra just to play it. And not sure if a 2GB card would do great on it, but it is a tempting idea. 0 Share this post Link to post
MrDeAD1313 Posted March 3, 2016 I played the alpha on an MSI R9 270x 2gb and played at the highest settings with no problem man. Granted it WAS only the alpha and MP at that, I think it'll do fine in the SP final release as well. I did buy it on Xbox One just in case lol 0 Share this post Link to post
Plasma Gun Posted March 3, 2016 PsychoGoatee said:You are tempting me, I guess my PC is closer to qualified than I figured. Though looking at the official page's alpha requirements: "Minimum Spec (720p) 64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8.1 Intel Core i5 @ 3.3 GHz or better / AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better 8 GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (2GB VRAM) / AMD Radeon HD 7870 (2GB VRAM) 6GB HDD space Steam account High speed internet connection *Please note that the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 680m and 860m models are below min spec for the DOOM Closed Alpha Recommended Spec (1080p) 64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8.1 Intel Core i7 @ 3.4GHz or better / AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0GHz or better 8GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 (3GB or more VRAM) / AMD Radeon R9 280 (3GB or more VRAM) 6GB HDD space Steam account High speed internet connection" I get the impression I'd be playing on lower settings or resolution, even if I spent 150-200 extra just to play it. And not sure if a 2GB card would do great on it, but it is a tempting idea. Radeon 380 w/ 4GB of RAM is $200 before rebate: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0AJ3VF2887&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-202-166-_-Product The 380 is at least as good as the 280 listed in the recommended specs. The NVIDIA equivalent, the GTX 960 w/ 4GB of RAM, is also $200: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127929&cm_re=gtx_960_4gb-_-14-127-929-_-Product If you can shell out the $200 for either the R9 380 or the GTX 960, then I think you will have a better experience (visually) than on either console, and a PC well equipped to play games on for a while to come. Just my 2ยข :) EDIT: Honestly, I don't know who the heck thought it was a good idea to tell people that a Core i7 3.4GHz is "recommended" and that a perfectly good Core i5 2500K is merely "minimum for 720P." I am 100% confident that the "min-spec" CPU paired with a solid GPU will play the game just fine. Are they just trying to push people to buy the console version?? 0 Share this post Link to post
PsychoGoatee Posted March 3, 2016 I appreciate the info, I'll definitely consider picking up a new card for DOOM. (edit: For the record, I went ahead and bought a Geforce GTX 970 and will be rocking this on PC!) 0 Share this post Link to post
Doomguy #876 Posted March 4, 2016 Lol, Nvidia doesn't even have drivers out for Doom. Anyone who thinks alpha benchmarks are going to be close to the final version's benchmarks are fucking stupid. I also find it hard to believe that a single 980 TI, especially a Classified, can't run the game at 60 fps at 1080p. Nice shit posting OP. 0 Share this post Link to post