Doom Alpha GPU test

J

JustReason

razor1 is my Lover
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,483
Ok so one month away from release and this game from a performance perspective looks good, although seems to have a hard 60fps cap.

DOOM Alpha тест GPU

The CPU tests should be very appealing to nearly all, that and the fact it can use up to 16 threads.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-2-18_22-10-27.png
    upload_2016-2-18_22-10-27.png
    367.9 KB · Views: 21
  • upload_2016-2-18_22-6-55.png
    upload_2016-2-18_22-6-55.png
    311.4 KB · Views: 24
Definitely seems to favor AMD cards for the time being ......probably same cap as Wolfenstein had i bet
 
JustReason said:
Ok so one month away from release and this game from a performance perspective looks good, although seems to have a hard 60fps cap.

DOOM Alpha тест GPU

The CPU tests should be very appealing to nearly all, that and the fact it can use up to 16 threads.
Click to expand...

Well looks like my CPU is safe for another year. I may never have to upgrade.
 
id Tech strikes again. :rolleyes:

Fucking hell we're in 2016, and if you have to lock 60 FPS because otherwise it breaks your game physics, just pack up and go home.
 
i read a tweet several months ago saying that an unnamed quake pro, among other quake pros testing the game, confirmed there was no fps cap in this game. guess it was bullshit?
 
That 60 FPS cap is just really disappointing especially for people who have a monitor that can drive over 100Hz or something is going to be a waste.

Not sure why ID went down this path, just hope this game and this supposed new engine doesn't have the same bullshit IDTech 5 demonstrated, like texture popping and ugly megatextures that looked like in the late 90's early 2000's really ruined the gaming experience. No doubt this game will have SLI/XFire support by the looks of it.
 
single 290 beats 980 sli? 980 sli equal to single 980?
WTB 1440p/4k data... Even tho the game is capped at 60, its nice to see some amd cpu in there!
 
SLI doesn't seem to be working and CFX can't really tell because of the cap.
 
Three months until this game is released. I'm optimistic the SLI mess will be sorted out, but it must be nice to have one of those AMD cards at the top and know you'll be sitting pretty.

My keen eye did notice the R9 280x was somehow able to break the 60 fps cap. This may be the card to buy for Doom!
 
Dayaks said:
A 280x is doing better than a 380x? A 280x is doing the same as a 980ti?

Or even more fun a 280x is doing 20% better than a 7970....

Where's my dumptruck of salt.
Click to expand...

280X have reasons to be more powerful than vanilla HD7970 due both GPU clocks and memory clocks, however I see no absolutely reason to see 280X doing any better than a 980TI.
 
With the 60fps limit anything at or near that doesn't necessarily make one better than another. Being early things could change, but what we should take note here is that the vast majority of ownership is going to fine.
 
Seems they have a lot of work to do with the nvidia cards. A 7970 faster than 980 SLI?
 
Nvidia seems to be struggling hardcore with the alpha. AMD cards seem to be pretty well optimized. Luckily there is still a ton of time to work on the former.
 
KazeoHin said:
FUCKING ID and their GODAMN 60FPS locking BULLSHIT.

Phew. Just needed to get that out.
Click to expand...

R9 280X shows 61fps so how they get that score if frame rate locked at 60?

My GTX780 only shows 35fps so NFG, no, I am not buying a new video card.
 
Neither SLI nor Crossfire is working on the Alpha, and again, it is an Alpha.

The only known thing is the fps lock, the 61 fps of the 280 may be a rounding error similar to how some 60Hz displays show up as 59fps on windows if it doesn't recognize the frequency of 59.97. In any case, ALPHA for both companies :p :)

Also, no settings beyond resolution and AA, everything else is automatically balanced by the game in the alpha.
 
Those crap charts that add Minimum + Average. The highest average score is #9 in the list.
 
What do Rift owners do with a 60fps hard cap when the device caps out at 90fps?
 
I am so happy I blew $500 on my 144 Hz monitor last year. :mad:

It seems like every fucking new game that I've bought since then is capped at 60 FPS. If I knew developers were essentially going to stop making 120+ FPS games, I would've bought a slower monitor with better PQ.
 
MacLeod said:
I am so happy I blew $500 on my 144 Hz monitor last year. :mad:

It seems like every fucking new game that I've bought since then is capped at 60 FPS. If I knew developers were essentially going to stop making 120+ FPS games, I would've bought a slower monitor with better PQ.
Click to expand...
Had to like that. :p Pretty funny and sad at the same time.
 
Looks like an ominous sign of consolitis.....but anyways, I thought ID Tech 6 doesn't support SLI ever?
 
JustReason said:
Had to like that. :p Pretty funny and sad at the same time.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. Oh well, this BenQ is still an excellent monitor so I'm not crying too much about it. At least I can still enjoy some older games at 120+. Oh and all the Borderlands games. Those guys never let ya down. LOL!
 
No SLI support and 60fps cap?

As someone who is running a 120hz monitor and triple SLI, looks like I won't be buying this game if this holds true... Hopefully this is all due to it being an Alpha. Too often people hold an alpha up to very high standards, moreso than would make sense even if it was a beta. I guess we'll see.
 
60 fps cap is unacceptable. I won't be buying this if it holds true in the final release.
 
wtf is going on with the GTX 980 numbers :rage:.....I just bought this thing....
 
It's not even a beta. It's a fucking alpha. This benchmark being meaningless might be an overstatement. The game is going to change a billion times before AMD and nVidia even bother tweaking their drivers. An internal release alpha is useless for us, the end user.
 
Dayaks said:
A 280x is doing better than a 380x? A 280x is doing the same as a 980ti?

Or even more fun a 280x is doing 20% better than a 7970....

Where's my dumptruck of salt.
Click to expand...
The alpha has no user-configurable graphics options, they're being auto-set by the engine based on its best-guess about your hardware.

The Nvidia cards might be getting auto-configed to higher settings, skewing the results.
 
CPU wise, I'm fine (2600K, overclocked to 4.4). GPU wise, I'm still not doing too bad (AMD 7950). Usually ID brings their A game. Enough to be the game that justifies an upgrade. And it sucks because with Q3, I could upgrade and see much higher FPS (not that they mattered after a certain point, but when you get so high, you're never below 60, then it's nice). Now, why upgrade? Not for Doom 4.

Locked at 60 sucks. I'm hoping they fix that at some point. Not that I'd notice much of a difference, but ID games were great benchmarks. Crank it up to Ultra, max out AA/AF, and watch them crawl. Now, you can do that and still have a good framerate. If I upgrade, I won't have anywhere to go. Can't crank up the settings, they'd already be at max.

Not so much a real bitch about it. It works, and it does a great job. It's efficient. It's just not fun to play around with as much as in the past. I'll play it and have fun, but when I upgrade my PC, I'll have to find another game to use as the benchmark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top