AMD Dominates the Battlefield V Closed Alpha

[rgMekanic]

Despite Battlefield V being a full blooded GeForce game, the crew at PCGamesN is reporting that AMD is handily winning the battle for performance so far. They pitted the GTX 1060 up against the RX 580 8GB at both 1080p and 1440p, and the results were surprising, with the RX 580 being around 33% faster.

While of course this is very early with plenty of time for more mature drivers to come out, this is still a pretty big surprise. Especially with the face that DICE and NVIDIA worked hand in hand on Battlefield V.

In general graphics testing the GTX 1060 and RX 580 regularly trade benchmark wins, but normally only by the slightest of margins. With the Battlefield 5 closed alpha, however, there is a sizeable disparity in performance, with the RX 580 some 33% faster in our tests. That’s not the only bad news for Nvidia either, as the DirectX 12 implementation in the game does its GPUs no favours either.

 

[PureBlackFire]

Nvidia will get right on top of that. the fps for AMD will be 30% lower when the game comes out.

 

[castlefire]

ok lets see who is winning at 4K DCI gameplay? i could never go back and play at anything under 4K DCI

 

[M76]

ok lets see who is winning at 4K DCI gameplay? i could never go back and play at anything under 4K DCI

WTF is DCI? The only dci I know of is "direct Common-rail Injection"

 

[SeymourGore]

Lets see how your beloved Radeon GPUs handle Battlefield V after some Gameworks SFX are enabled, rgMekanic !

 

[d8lock]

WTF is DCI? The only dci I know of is "direct Common-rail Injection"

It's 4096 by 2160 instead of 3840 by 2160.

 

[FlawleZ]

So this would theoretically put RX 580 in 1070 territory or even faster in BFV. I'd be interested to see the Vega performance here. Idk maybe it shouldn't be posted or the 1080 Ti owners may have an aneurysm.

 

[velusip]

Nvidia will get right on top of that. the fps for AMD will be 30% lower when the game comes out.

In the early days ATI cards were beating Nvidia with higher fps, but Nvidia were claiming that rendering shortcuts and missing features in ATIs pipeline were the reason. They argued with 'fidelity'. I would love to see that argument attempted this time around.

 

[Croak]

Nvidia will get right on top of that. the fps for AMD will be 30% lower when the game comes out.

Could just be that Nvidia rolled out their deliberate 10 series and older performance degradations a bit early. They usually wait until the next series launches before they hobble the older cards.

 

[PureBlackFire]

In the early days ATI cards were beating Nvidia with higher fps, but Nvidia were claiming that rendering shortcuts and missing features in ATIs pipeline were the reason. They argued with 'fidelity'. I would love to see that argument attempted this time around.

this went both ways over the years. Nvidia leads the image quality cheating series 3-1 vs ATI/AMD.

Could just be that Nvidia rolled out their deliberate 10 series and older performance degradations a bit early. They usually wait until the next series launches before they hobble the older cards.

true. rumors are swirling that their new series will be out this month. hmm...

 

[haz_mat]

Meh, closed alpha with unoptimized drivers. Do AMD fanboys really want to claim a win here?

 

[Brokennails]

Meh, closed alpha with unoptimized drivers. Do AMD fanboys really want to claim a win here?

That can go both ways lol. Funny how logic works right....

 

[Ferox]

Or we could be dealing with another Assasins creed (directx 10.1) mishap where Nvidia makes the dev cripple any feature that runs better on AMD hardware. Gameworks just means Nvidia uses their shit tools and effects to make their own hardware look good. Nvidia will sacrifice innovation any day over allowing a competitors product to beat theirs. Its pathetic.

 

[bos]

Yeah, the alpha and beta for BF1 were nothing like the actual release hardware performance wise so I wouldn't read much into this. My 3570k and SLI 660tis killed in alpha and beta, but shit the bed come release barely keeping 50fps with lots of dips into the 20-30s.

 

[Nobu]

Rather than unoptimized code, I expect it's (mostly) due to not having all effects enabled/working yet. This is alpha code we're talking about here. I doubt they've moved passed feature and gameplay bugs to graphical bugs yet.

That's not to say they aren't fixing them, but I don't think that's the primary focus right now.

 

[rgMekanic]

 

[sirmonkey1985]

Yeah, the alpha and beta for BF1 were nothing like the actual release hardware performance wise so I wouldn't read much into this. My 3570k and SLI 660tis killed in alpha and beta, but shit the bed come release barely keeping 50fps with lots of dips into the 20-30s.

yeah the problem with dice "alpha" testing is that in BF3/1 they hard capped graphic settings to medium. wouldn't surprise me if they did it again with BF5. even my shitty sli 8800GT's were able to play BF3 alpha at 40-50fps, game release i got a whopping 15fps.

 

[Chris_B]

Nvidia will get right on top of that. the fps for AMD will be 30% lower when the game comes out.

Pish

 

[SighTurtle]

yeah the problem with dice "alpha" testing is that in BF3/1 they hard capped graphic settings to medium. wouldn't surprise me if they did it again with BF5. even my shitty sli 8800GT's were able to play BF3 alpha at 40-50fps, game release i got a whopping 15fps.

Played the alpha, they didn't optimize much, had to run it at the lowest settings to enjoy 60+ fps, I have a 4690k and a 580. I don't like how PCGamesN didn't specify the graphic settings it tested for the GTX 1060 vs RX 580, would have been nice to compare with my experience. Also they state that the GTX 1080Ti ran at 114 fps at Ultra on 1080p, a little strange to test 1080p considering thats a 4k card if anything.

 

[Naieve]

View attachment 86218

Every Developer hits both buttons and releases it prematurely.

 

[MooCow]

"The way it's meant to be played" might catch up.

 

[Brackle]

Don't worry Nvidia will add gameworks, and AMD performance (and possibly Nvidia) Performance will tank.

 

[04SVT]

Wonder how it runs on the 1080...

 

[Trimlock]

Wonder how it runs on the 1080...

My understanding is that it’s not running well on any hardware.

 

[gamerk2]

My understanding is that it’s not running well on any hardware.

Which indicates the game is probably sensitive to GPU memory bandwidth. That's the one area where ATI/AMD has always had an edge on NVIDIA.

 

[Trimlock]

Which indicates the game is probably sensitive to GPU memory bandwidth. That's the one area where ATI/AMD has always had an edge on NVIDIA.

Probably, would make a solid argument for the 580 over the 1060.

 

[Master_shake_]

a little bit of gameworks will fix that sticky wicket.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

WTF is DCI? The only dci I know of is "direct Common-rail Injection"

1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2
/Secret handshake

 

[HockeyJon]

Anyone else love reading these threads just to see comments from fanboys who are so devoted to a video card company that they react as if someone insulted their own child?

 

[Trimlock]

Anyone else love reading these threads just to see comments from fanboys who are so devoted to a video card company that they react as if someone insulted their own child?

Almost as if someone kicked their dog.

 

[Croak]

1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2
/Secret handshake

1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3 master race.

 

[Gideon]

1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3 master race.

Oh were doing a thing, 1-5-3-6-2-4. Real diesels only have 6

 

[readeh]

Yeah, the alpha and beta for BF1 were nothing like the actual release hardware performance wise so I wouldn't read much into this. My 3570k and SLI 660tis killed in alpha and beta, but shit the bed come release barely keeping 50fps with lots of dips into the 20-30s.

Yeah it was really weird as my gtx 1080 was getting 150-180 fps in the beta, but only 110-130 fps at release, while graphics staying the same and looking the same. Later got a 1080ti and still couldn't get the fps I had with the 1080 in beta

 

[readeh]

Wonder how it runs on the 1080...

it's impossible to play on ultra settings with good fps, but perhaps titan V can do it. I'm getting good fps on low at around 125-145 fps with a 1070 and the game still looks good. Should have tried it on the wife's rig as it has a 1080ti, but will most likely snap up a 1180 before release(I hope).

 

[Krenum]

 

[sirmonkey1985]

Almost as if someone kicked their dog.

equal rights, yo.. can't kick one without kicking the other, it wouldn't be fair to both dogs.

 

[Trimlock]

equal rights, yo.. can't kick one without kicking the other, it wouldn't be fair to both dogs.

#equaldogkickingrights

 

[M76]

It's 4096 by 2160 instead of 3840 by 2160.

Aren't the panel in TVs 3840x2160 pixels?

 

[spine]

Lets see how your beloved Radeon GPUs handle Battlefield V after some Gameworks SFX are enabled, rgMekanic !

There'll be Volta hardware specific shit thrown in there too no doubt.

Count on it, there'll be some feature or effect that only Volta can do properly and tanks on everything else, including Pascal. Nvidia have no problems making their own cards look like shit if they're in a position to sell you better ones!

 

[DukenukemX]

But yes, these are early days for Battlefield 5, and I’m sure things will improve as Nvidia’s engineers get to grips with the code

HAHA, yea either the Nvidia engineers will have DX12 removed (even though it doesn't give any performance benefits) or they'll just have the game render things that it doesn't need to. This is Nvidia we're talking about here, their history explains it all.