AMD and Nvidia compared in DX12 Fable Legends

plexx

n00b
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
42
Component Selection
CPU Intel Core i5-6600K
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme 4
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 1300 G2
HDD SanDisk Extreme II 120GB
Storage Disk Seagate 2TB
Memory 16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4 2400
Monitor Dell P2715Q
Video Cards AMD R9 Fury, AMD R9 Fury Nano, GeForce GTX Titan X
Operating System Window 10 64-Bit

Fable-635x508.jpg


With the latest AMD Catalyst 15.9 beta driver, the Titan X is slightly ahead of the R9 Fury. It has an advantage of 1.15 average FPS or +1.52% (Albeit at a much higher cost)

NVIDIA was confident that the alpha benchmark of Ashes of the Singularity wasn’t representative of general performance under DirectX 12, and now we can easily understand why. As pointed out by Lionhead, most modern games are far heavier on the GPU and reducing CPU overhead, while still undoubtedly a benefit, will be less important in these cases.
 
A benchmark with zero gameplay is more representative than a benchmark that has actual AI code executing real time.......
Also the Fury & nano right with Titan X is awesome, bring on the competitions where they are trying to gain a few fps for bragging rights.
 
Plexx could you link the article in your post comes from? I have no idea what this test is about other than they played a game called Fable Legends. Also it is plagiarism if you don't give credit to the source.
 
Where are the DX11 results to compare? It doesn't really mean anything without that.

Also, the Fury is half the price of the Titan X and has nearly equal performance in this test.
 
The 980ti is 11% faster @ 1080p and 19% faster @ 4K than the Fury.

Where are the DX11 results to compare? It doesn't really mean anything without that.

Its not DX11.

Looks like Titan X has a driver issue as it should outperform the 980ti.
 
The 980ti is 11% faster @ 1080p and 19% faster @ 4K than the Fury.

Looks like Titan X has a driver issue as it should outperform the 980ti.

Wish they had a Fury X to compare, but some numbers are better than no numbers. :)
 
So Fable legends is just a tech demo. at least on the PC.

It doesn't even have simulated combat from what I'm reading. When you bunch everyone together into a small corner of the map, and duke it, out is when you find out if your system is up to snuff. :)
 
Looks CPU constrained to me. Fury Nano should lag Fury X a lot more?
 
Looks like Titan X has a driver issue as it should outperform the 980ti.
They used a Palit JetStream 980 Ti so I assume it has a factory OC. There's already plenty of other Fable benchmarks out there so there's no reason to pick this one apart.

If this game is CPU bottlenecking a 6600K at a measely ~70fps 1080p, people are going to be fucked when they actually try to play it.
 
They used a Palit JetStream 980 Ti so I assume it has a factory OC. There's already plenty of other Fable benchmarks out there so there's no reason to pick this one apart.

If this game is CPU bottlenecking a 6600K at a measely ~70fps 1080p, people are going to be fucked when they actually try to play it.

Yer right, its clocked 15% higher.
That explains how it defeats the Titan.
The high end cards from both camps are neck and neck at reference clocks.
The higher clocked cards and overclocks will make the difference.

So probably not largely CPU limited
 
Back
Top