The Division DX12 (gameplay) benchmarks

Malabooga

So this is actual gameplay, not game benchmark

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-12/the-division-dx12-benchmark/#diagramm-the-division-mit-directx-12-3840-2160







So NVidia cards lose FPS in DX12 again when GPU is the bottleneck. Only 1080 gains FPS in 1080p (pointless lol)

also, look at that 100$ FX83xx go against 350$ Intel CPU ha ha ha

Cleffy

CPU really does not matter for a game like this. You can also get similar results with a core i5.

filmoret

Look at those AMD cpu's bottlenecking the Nvidia cards.  Sneaky...

Cleffy

1~3 fps difference is well within the margin of error. Some of the scenarios has it running faster on the AMD cpus like the 1080 at 4k resolution on DX12. Still well within the margin of error.
The AMD CPUs are most likely hitting a wall at around 75 fps.

I think what we are seeing here are 2 things happening in favor of AMD. First is better driver support. Right now AMD simply has better driver support which makes the 480 perform better than the 1060. Second is that developers in general will have an AMD bias since they are also developing a console version. The developer has to cater to AMD before any other platform.

filmoret

Cleffy said:

1~3 fps difference is well within the margin of error. Some of the scenarios has it running faster on the AMD cpus like the 1080 at 4k resolution on DX12. Still well within the margin of error.
The AMD CPUs are most likely hitting a wall at around 75 fps.

I think what we are seeing here are 2 things happening in favor of AMD. First is better driver support. Right now AMD simply has better driver support which makes the 480 perform better than the 1060. Second is that developers in general will have an AMD bias since they are also developing a console version. The developer has to cater to AMD before any other platform.

This has been true for over 5 years and still hasn't proven to be how you described.

Cleffy

If you look at any benchmark for games ported that are built for the PS4 and XBox One, it's quite clear they have a large bias for AMD GPUs. Unless of course you think the RX 480s competition is the GTX 1070. The performance difference with full-implementations of DX12/Vulkan on AMD is mind-staggering. It's quite clear developers target the hardware.
It takes years to develop in-house engines. Ubisoft's engine was not magically optimized 5 years ago. Just now middle-ware engines are starting to optimize for current generation consoles. AMD drivers have been on par with nVidia drivers for the last 5 years, but it wasn't until the last year that AMD has gone to the much more aggressive driver releases.

Malabooga

filmoret said:

Cleffy said:

1~3 fps difference is well within the margin of error. Some of the scenarios has it running faster on the AMD cpus like the 1080 at 4k resolution on DX12. Still well within the margin of error.
The AMD CPUs are most likely hitting a wall at around 75 fps.

I think what we are seeing here are 2 things happening in favor of AMD. First is better driver support. Right now AMD simply has better driver support which makes the 480 perform better than the 1060. Second is that developers in general will have an AMD bias since they are also developing a console version. The developer has to cater to AMD before any other platform.

This has been true for over 5 years and still hasn't proven to be how you described.

API that supports that, namely DX12/Vulkan OTOH wasnt. PC API was substantially different than consoles up to DX12/Vulkan.

Reizla

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Phry

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

You would probably need a 144hz monitor to see the difference between 48 and 100 fps really, on a regular 60hz monitor, i doubt there is really all that much difference, although the closer you can get to 60 fps the better if only from a controller lag standpoint.
Also, is the FX8350 really the best AMD CPU to use? if comparing it to an i7 then wouldn't something like the FX9590 have been better? Only reason i am wondering is that i have the FX9590 in my own system and it handles everything very well, though admittedly i have a Nvidia 980ti GPU rather than one of the newer ones.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

filmoret

Phry said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

You would probably need a 144hz monitor to see the difference between 48 and 100 fps really, on a regular 60hz monitor, i doubt there is really all that much difference, although the closer you can get to 60 fps the better if only from a controller lag standpoint.
Also, is the FX8350 really the best AMD CPU to use? if comparing it to an i7 then wouldn't something like the FX9590 have been better? Only reason i am wondering is that i have the FX9590 in my own system and it handles everything very well, though admittedly i have a Nvidia 980ti GPU rather than one of the newer ones.

I'll check that out.  I have 60z monitor and I can tell the difference between 45-60.  I would definitely like to game at 45 considering I'm using a laptop and that decrease in fps makes a huge difference at my gaming level.

filmoret

filmoret said:

Phry said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

You would probably need a 144hz monitor to see the difference between 48 and 100 fps really, on a regular 60hz monitor, i doubt there is really all that much difference, although the closer you can get to 60 fps the better if only from a controller lag standpoint.
Also, is the FX8350 really the best AMD CPU to use? if comparing it to an i7 then wouldn't something like the FX9590 have been better? Only reason i am wondering is that i have the FX9590 in my own system and it handles everything very well, though admittedly i have a Nvidia 980ti GPU rather than one of the newer ones.

I'll check that out.  I have 60z monitor and I can tell the difference between 45-60.  I would definitely like to game at 45 considering I'm using a laptop and that decrease in fps makes a huge difference at my gaming level.

Ok just tested 48 and it really will depend on what game you are playing.  Strafing in archeage was the easiest way to tell.  But its such a minor difference I'm going to try this for a while and see if it will work for me.

Malabooga

DMKano said:

All I see is that Nvidia 1080s are the fastest in all benchmarks.

And? It costs 700$ what is majority of peopels budget for whole rig lol

55-60% faster and 200% more expencive. Value of that card is abbysmal as real performance value is 200*1,55/1,6= 310$-320$

Reizla

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

Phry

Malabooga said:

DMKano said:

All I see is that Nvidia 1080s are the fastest in all benchmarks.

And? It costs 700$ what is majority of peopels budget for whole rig lol

55-60% faster and 200% more expencive. Value of that card is abbysmal as real performance value is 200*1,55/1,6= 310$-320$

I ran The Division benchmark tool, average FPS was 68, which considering i was running the game at 2560x1440 at max graphics, means that my 980ti outperforms a 1080, way to go me!
And yes, thats using Win10 and Dx12, using an AMD FX9590, with 16gb of ultra fast DDR3, actually i lied, i have the cheap DDR3
Benchmark tool shows that CPU is 57% usage and GPU 97%
I can only imagine that the reason for the disparity of the benchmark readings, is that the OP's results were not from the games built in benchmark tool, but from some other benchmark tool unrelated to The Division? either that or my 980ti is ultra powerful  O.o

botrytis

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Phry

botrytis said:

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Security? tbh Win 10 is only as secure as the third party software you use to protect it, and just as insecure as all the previous versions if you don't. O.o

botrytis

Phry said:

botrytis said:

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Security? tbh Win 10 is only as secure as the third party software you use to protect it, and just as insecure as all the previous versions if you don't. O.o

Not true. If you believe that - fine. BUT, EVEN THE SECURITY EXPERTS SAY WIN 10 IS MORE SECURE OUT OF THE BOX.

Every OS is the same, the OS is only as secure as the operator.

filmoret

BY the time developers start using dx12 they will have dx 13

Ridelynn

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

Well, I don't see that Windows has a lot to do between your two different scenarios. It seems the significant bump in the hardware you describe has more to do with it than anything else.

Malabooga

Phry said:

Malabooga said:

DMKano said:

All I see is that Nvidia 1080s are the fastest in all benchmarks.

And? It costs 700$ what is majority of peopels budget for whole rig lol

55-60% faster and 200% more expencive. Value of that card is abbysmal as real performance value is 200*1,55/1,6= 310$-320$

I ran The Division benchmark tool, average FPS was 68, which considering i was running the game at 2560x1440 at max graphics, means that my 980ti outperforms a 1080, way to go me!
And yes, thats using Win10 and Dx12, using an AMD FX9590, with 16gb of ultra fast DDR3, actually i lied, i have the cheap DDR3
Benchmark tool shows that CPU is 57% usage and GPU 97%
I can only imagine that the reason for the disparity of the benchmark readings, is that the OP's results were not from the games built in benchmark tool, but from some other benchmark tool unrelated to The Division? either that or my 980ti is ultra powerful  O.o

you are right, the OP result sare from actual gameplay not benchmark tool

for instnce, in benchmark tool, RX480 does 77 FPS in 1080p DX12 ultra.

Asm0deus

botrytis said:

Phry said:

botrytis said:

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Security? tbh Win 10 is only as secure as the third party software you use to protect it, and just as insecure as all the previous versions if you don't. O.o

Not true. If you believe that - fine. BUT, EVEN THE SECURITY EXPERTS SAY WIN 10 IS MORE SECURE OUT OF THE BOX.

Every OS is the same, the OS is only as secure as the operator.

Sure it's safer out of the box..... because you're letting big brother in to "watch over you" thus making you more secure while having less choice in some areas because ofc big bro knows best!

Cleffy

I have jumped along through each Windows iteration since 3.1. Windows 10 is definitely the best which makes sense. I also use a Windows Phone which may sway my views (I love the live tiles). The OS is much more portable. The start menu is very informative. The applications run smoothly and efficiently. How it runs applications is much more secure. It's a lot easier to debug programs and make them run how you want them to run. Microsoft provides a lot of tools for creating Unified Windows Platform applications with mobile, tablet, and desktop versions.
One thing for me is I have never needed to right-click an application and set it to run in compatibility mode. The OS just does so much for you.

botrytis

Asm0deus said:

botrytis said:

Phry said:

botrytis said:

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Security? tbh Win 10 is only as secure as the third party software you use to protect it, and just as insecure as all the previous versions if you don't. O.o

Not true. If you believe that - fine. BUT, EVEN THE SECURITY EXPERTS SAY WIN 10 IS MORE SECURE OUT OF THE BOX.

Every OS is the same, the OS is only as secure as the operator.

Sure it's safer out of the box..... because you're letting big brother in to "watch over you" thus making you more secure while having less choice in some areas because ofc big bro knows best!

LOL - every OS since WP XP did that - better stop with the kool aid, you might get even more paranoid.

Less choice? I don't get it. It has the same or more choices, it depends on the hardware manufacturers to write the drivers, not MS.


Like I said, please stop drinking that kool aid, it is meant for Trump supporters now.

Asm0deus

botrytis said:

Asm0deus said:

botrytis said:

Phry said:

botrytis said:

Reizla said:

blueturtle13 said:

Reizla said:

Thanks for posting this. Clearly DX12 isn't that big a deal if you don't have a top-PC (which is what I've been saying for 2 years already). Basically, if you have a mid-range PC (like mine), you'd best stick to Win7/8 and keep your privacy. If you REALLY are a epeen junkie and want to see the difference between 48FPS (FX8350/GTX1060) and 100FPS (i7/GTX1080), then Windows 10 is yours for the price of your privacy (if you can even see the difference between 48 and 100 FPS to start with...)

DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead. Clearly it is a big deal.

True, yet looking at the same statement about DX10 and DX11 being a dramatic increase over DX9 and how long it took for the developers to actually use it and how it's used in general (mostly fog/lightning shading only on top of DX9 graphics) I still stand with my statement on epeen and it not being worth to hop to Windows 10...

It wasn't the video card drivers that were behind, it was the game engines and game developers. Many get locked into a specific Direct X generation. Like GW2, which is still Dx 9.0c, which is more CPU than GPU.

Windows 10 IS worth jumping onto. Why SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY. All other Windows will just get major security updates or none at all (like Win XP).

Security? tbh Win 10 is only as secure as the third party software you use to protect it, and just as insecure as all the previous versions if you don't. O.o

Not true. If you believe that - fine. BUT, EVEN THE SECURITY EXPERTS SAY WIN 10 IS MORE SECURE OUT OF THE BOX.

Every OS is the same, the OS is only as secure as the operator.

Sure it's safer out of the box..... because you're letting big brother in to "watch over you" thus making you more secure while having less choice in some areas because ofc big bro knows best!

LOL - every OS since WP XP did that - better stop with the kool aid, you might get even more paranoid.

Less choice? I don't get it. It has the same or more choices, it depends on the hardware manufacturers to write the drivers, not MS.


Like I said, please stop drinking that kool aid, it is meant for Trump supporters now.

LMAO you're the one that needs to stop drinking the MS cool aid.  I don't really have a beef with MS I never did but w10 has clearly moved away from freedom of choice when it comes to disabling certain things to a new mobile phone BS type OS that wants to tell you Hey I wanna be apple so do things like this or don't use me at all.

If you think your privacy is anywhere as secure as any of the OS they produced before you're seriously deluding yourself.

Have a good read you really need it:

https://itvision.altervista.org/why-windows-10-sucks.html

 Lastly but not least if ever there was an OS that resembled Trump it surely is windows 10.