Dragon Age Inquisition benchmarks.

The Mac

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
4,492
i assume DAI will have mod support at some point, the other 2 did.
 

FnordMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,727
Ouch.. sounds like it's GTX 970 time very soon if I want to play this game at ultra at 1080p.
Just have a single GTX 660 right now.
 

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,326
Ouch.. sounds like it's GTX 970 time very soon if I want to play this game at ultra at 1080p.
Just have a single GTX 660 right now.

I'd hold off on any of the new cards coming out unless they have at least 6 GB of VRAM. games seemed to have gone from being fine on 2 GB to needing more than 4, rather than transitioning to being useful with 4.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
5
Running the game in DX11 on default Ultra setting under graphics I get 72 average and 56 minimum FPS with the internal benchmark test under Extras. Resolution set to 2560x1440. It is very smooth no issues. If I go into Graphics and set all settings to the far right maximum settings for everything I get 54.6 average and 44.4 minimum FPS which is not bad if that internal benchmark is the game at its highest stress level.

Game is installed on SanDisk Extreme Pro SSD quick list applicable system specs. Monitor Asus PB278Q max res 2560x1440.
i7 5960X @ 4Ghz with 16GB Quad Channel DDR4 2800 RAM, Asus Rampage V Extreme MB
2 Asus R290X DCII OC cards they run at 1050MHz overclock DDR5 RAM at 5400 overclock set in Crossfire of course.
Catalyst driver version 14.11.2 beta released today.

If I try and use the Mantle API though I get long freezes followed by the graphics speeding up for a few seconds after like it gets stuck then plays catch up. Not sure if this is a driver issue or what. Maybe Mantle is not working well with Crossfire, I will have to disable Crossfire and try Mantle again to see if that's it. Right now though I'll stick with DX11 as that seems smooth as butter.
 

dewbak75

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
252
Running the game in DX11 on default Ultra setting under graphics I get 72 average and 56 minimum FPS with the internal benchmark test under Extras. Resolution set to 2560x1440. It is very smooth no issues. If I go into Graphics and set all settings to the far right maximum settings for everything I get 54.6 average and 44.4 minimum FPS which is not bad if that internal benchmark is the game at its highest stress level.

Game is installed on SanDisk Extreme Pro SSD quick list applicable system specs. Monitor Asus PB278Q max res 2560x1440.
i7 5960X @ 4Ghz with 16GB Quad Channel DDR4 2800 RAM, Asus Rampage V Extreme MB
2 Asus R290X DCII OC cards they run at 1050MHz overclock DDR5 RAM at 5400 overclock set in Crossfire of course.
Catalyst driver version 14.11.2 beta released today.

If I try and use the Mantle API though I get long freezes followed by the graphics speeding up for a few seconds after like it gets stuck then plays catch up. Not sure if this is a driver issue or what. Maybe Mantle is not working well with Crossfire, I will have to disable Crossfire and try Mantle again to see if that's it. Right now though I'll stick with DX11 as that seems smooth as butter.

If I understand Mantle correctly, Crossfire support is handled by the application, not the driver, so it's up to the game to decide how it makes uses of multiple graphics cards. For example, Firaxis decided to use a custom form of split-frame rendering instead of the typical alternate-frame rendering when you run Civilization: Beyond Earth in Mantle on a Crossfire rig. I don't know how responsive Bioware is on their forums, but it might be worth trying to get a response out of them regarding Crossfire support in DA:I. That being said, I'm pretty sure I've seen posts from people running the game in Crossfire without issue, though I don't know if they were running in DX11 or Mantle.
 

Rizen

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2000
Messages
9,364
I'm running the game in CrossFireX under Mantle and it works fine.
 

hdgamer

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
816
I'd hold off on any of the new cards coming out unless they have at least 6 GB of VRAM. games seemed to have gone from being fine on 2 GB to needing more than 4, rather than transitioning to being useful with 4.

This game doesn't seem to be running out of vram though on my GTX660ti at 1080p resolution. I turned all the settings to max and watch the fps drop to 17-28 in the first part of the game. Never stuttered, but afterburner did say it was maxed out. I think we have another scenerio here where the game uses vram as resources rather than the absolute frame buffer. The scary thing is the game was almost playable at ultra settings in the high teens.
 

LigTasm

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
5,065
Seems to be a new 344.75 driver optimized for this game now. Going to give it a try right now.
 

pigwalk

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
8,417
This game doesn't seem to be running out of vram though on my GTX660ti at 1080p resolution.

What's the final settings you ended up playing it at? One notch below ultra-high, or was maxed playable?
 

hdgamer

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
816
What's the final settings you ended up playing it at? One notch below ultra-high, or was maxed playable?

I can play at high settings with tessellation at med and no msaa with good solid frames above 27+. If I want 60 at all times, medium, with no msaa. I haven't seen much more then the first two hours of the game yet so may struggle in parts later.
 

Curl

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
231
Right now I'm running Mantle with:

Mesh: Ultra
Tessellation: Low
Texture: Fade Touched
Shadow: Ultra
Terrain: Ultra
Vegetation: Ultra
Water: Ultra
PostProcess: Ultra
Ambient Occlusion: SSAO
Effects: Ultra
Post-Process AA: High
MSAA: Off

I also disabled Motion Blur via config file and added the NFS Rivals command line switches to get the cutscenes to run at 60fps. With this config, the only time the framerate dips is when I'm out in the world and the fog rolls in. Instantly goes to 40fps. Will prolly adjust it via config file or something soon.
 

convexion

Gawd
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
946
I'd hold off on any of the new cards coming out unless they have at least 6 GB of VRAM. games seemed to have gone from being fine on 2 GB to needing more than 4, rather than transitioning to being useful with 4.

Nah, I'm pulling 90-100 fps easy and smooth in gameplay at 1440p, 2xAA with all other settings max in DA:I on rig in sig in game. The timedemo benchmark is a little more harsh than what I've played so far. The in-engine cutscenes piss me off though, don't know why they felt the need to reduce them to 30 fps. It's jarring.
 
D

Deleted member 273615

Guest
Is "Fade Touched" better than Ultra? Its a notch above, but usually fading is a bit of downgrade AFAIK. Any AMD vs nVidia benchmark? It seems to run running perfectly fine with GTX 980 @ 1480Mhz and 3770K @ 4.8Ghz.
 

Cyberbeing

Gawd
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
569
Is "Fade Touched" better than Ultra? Its a notch above, but usually fading is a bit of downgrade AFAIK.
Fade-Touched is likely just Bioware's idea of a lore joke, when they couldn't figure out what to call the next texture resolution jump above Ultra. I don't believe you're supposed to take it to literally mean faded textures, but who knows.
 
Last edited:

harmattan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
4,607
Fade-Touched is likely just likely just Bioware's idea of lore joke, when they couldn't figure out what to call the next texture resolution jump above Ultra. I don't believe you're supposed to take it to literally mean faded textures, but who knows.

Right. It's Bioware's tong-in-cheek way of saying "Ultra-Ultra". Fade Touched in the sense that your eyes are so good as a PC gamer that you can see the supernatural.
 

tobi54

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
167
Does it have an in-game res scaler like BF4? just curious since they're both running on Frostibite.
 

hdgamer

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
816
I have two computers hooked up to each a 1080p 60" tv. One computer has a 780ti, the other a 660ti. The 780ti I can max out with drops in the high 30's with some stuttering but most of the time I'm in the 50-60 range with vsync enabled. The 660ti I can play at high with some settings on medium with the frames going between high 20's to low 40's.

For some reason the 660ti is playing smoother and yet doesn't look that much worse than the game on the highest settings. Sure there's a difference, but not enough for me to spend hundreds of dollars to upgrade for imo (seeing that I already have the upgrade). This game is a beauty though when it comes to rpg graphics and once you get past that the gameplay is what is sucking me in.
 

Tzzird

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
5,891
In case anyone with a more modest system wants to compare numbers, I just upgraded to an R9 280 from a 5850.

1080p No Mantle
Ultra 35.1 Average, 29.4 Minimum

1080p Mantle
Ultra 27.1 Average, 27.3 Minimum

1440p Mantle
Ultra 22.1 Average, 19.6 Minimum

These are with the default ultra settings with v-sync off; I didn't change anything else.

Based off the numbers, I think I'm best running 1080p without Mantle or 1440p with Mantle on High which gets me 33.3 Average and 31.3 Minimum.
 

DPI

Nitpick Police
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,091
Didn't see it mentioned in this thread but just like in BF4, the in-game FPS counter can be enabled by hitting ~ to bring up console then type perfoverlay.drawfps 1 <enter> and then hit ~ again
 

magictoaster

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
453
Looking forward to play this with my new crossfire setup. :) I have relegated my 2x GTX Titan to my girlfriend computer and replace them with 2x MSI R9 290X Lightning. I'm in Canada so both cards where about 100$ more than ONE GTX980...

Performance with the Titan is good but the game is still incredibly taxing especially when MSAA is enabled. The thing that kills it for me is the atrocious texture flashing/popping when SLI is enabled (even with the latest drivers).
 

Lord_Exodia

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
7,008
Quick question to everyone playing the game here

I read that the rpg elements are fantastic, the map vast, gameplay fun and all

Does the sorry really suck? From what I've seen many said the story was kind of abysmal as in it does nothing to help suck you in the game. I need a epic and engrossing story to help me dump 200+ hours into a game like this game is asking for.

What do you guys honestly think so far?
 

The Mac

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
4,492
the beginning is a bit repetitive (hinterlands), but once you get Skyhold, it really gets interesting. In biowares defence, it really takes that long to understand how to play. There are enough different elements of basic gameplay that you need that much time to acclimate.

The world is massive, and i mean MASSIVE. And there is an incredible amount of things to do.

Hinterlands could be a game all by itself. Wandering around, quest after quest after quest starts opening up, its almost overwhelming if you open the quest log.

And thats only one area of many

The cool thing is unlike prior dragon ages, as your power and influence grows the different areas start to gain more people, and the general tone of their bantering changes.

It makes it feel really dynamic.

And the funny companion bantering is even better this time around. I wont spoil it by quoting it, but Casandra makes a comment about Varic's chest hair that had me almost pee my pants.
 
Last edited:

DPI

Nitpick Police
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
11,091
Quick question to everyone playing the game here

I read that the rpg elements are fantastic, the map vast, gameplay fun and all

Does the sorry really suck? From what I've seen many said the story was kind of abysmal as in it does nothing to help suck you in the game. I need a epic and engrossing story to help me dump 200+ hours into a game like this game is asking for.

What do you guys honestly think so far?

This is the benchmarking thread. The discussion thread is here:

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1041244693
 

MyGHz

n00b
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
1
Hi guys, I have an i7-4770k @stock, 16GB memory and a HD 7990 but I am getting fps of 51.4 in the internal benchmark! Is that the expected score for this card?
 

ebduncan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,007
Hi guys, I have an i7-4770k @stock, 16GB memory and a HD 7990 but I am getting fps of 51.4 in the internal benchmark! Is that the expected score for this card?


i guess that would depend highly on the settings.;)
 

Neon01

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
1,041
Anyone try the new Nvidia 344.80 drivers with DA:I? This game is ridiculously taxing for graphical performance. Way slower than Crysis 3 or TW2 with ubersampling even, and I think both of those look at least as good.
 

Zorlag

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
272
Might have something to do with the large view range. Terrain looks pretty detailed even far away.
 
Top