Review: Destiny 2: PC graphics benchmarks

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 25, 2017.

  1. Seikon

    Seikon Active Member

    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    14
    GPU:
    MSI RX480 Gaming X 8g
    :O if only i had Destiny 2 , i love to test it with a rx580 bios vs 480 one @ same clock speed's , would be kinda crap if AMD screwd up this.
     
  2. robtorbay

    robtorbay Master Guru

    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    6
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 980ti SLI
    Thanks for this article! I was benching the game on my PC last night with 2 980tis in SLI and was wondering if the performance was good, bad or indifferent!

    Uncapped FPS ranged from 64 to 67 FPS @ 4k on ultra settings. I was pleased.

    Thanks again!
     
  3. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    40,773
    Likes Received:
    9,183
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Not likely, it more likely is a bug or something weirdly isolated on my end. Will re-test once a newer driver is out.
     
    signex and airbud7 like this.
  4. AlmondMan

    AlmondMan Master Guru

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    137
    GPU:
    5700 XT Red Devil
    Seems unlikely to me - must be more of a bug than anything else.

    Tempted to buy the game, though. Getting good reviews.
     

  5. Embra

    Embra Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,144
    Likes Received:
    344
    GPU:
    Vega 64 Nitro+LE
    Issue seems to be with the 480, as the Furys and 570 perform good as well.
    A bug makes the most sense.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2017
  6. Redemption80

    Redemption80 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,460
    Likes Received:
    253
    GPU:
    GALAX 970/ASUS 970
    Surely (hopefully) that's a bug, as even my "it will never age well" 970 is around 20% faster than RX 480.

    Not being lazy (at work) but has any site tested with a 290X?
     
  7. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    No one but you has tested in there reviews the 480 so you may be onto something.

    That was tongue-in-cheek.

    But there may be more to it than that. AMD claimed improvement on Vega and 5xx they said nothing about 4xx.

    Why is it if Nvidia cards had done this there are a few user on here that would be flaming non-stop, but AMD does this and, "It's just a bug."

    Look at the 470 as well. There is something more to this.
     
  8. Goiur

    Goiur Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    378
    GPU:
    ASUS TUF RTX 3080
    **GN** did, look for the link on my first post in the previous page. Perfomance was similar for them.
     
  9. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    No link there. I will look again but GN’s review I read didn’t have 470/480 results. I’ll look more but this is odd to me. The spread from 4xx to 5xx cards looks normal in 1080 but jumps tremendously in 1440 and 4K. I’m just skeptical of that. It would not be the first time either vender pulled this kind of crap. However usually it’s because it’s a new architecture like Kepler to Maxwell or TeraScale to GCN.

    The more I look the more I feel it’s the AMD driver making DoF highest=high.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2017
    airbud7 likes this.
  10. CrazY_Milojko

    CrazY_Milojko Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,096
    Likes Received:
    420
    GPU:
    Asus STRIX 1070 OC
    Thanks for benchmark HH!

    Nice to see Vega performing so well in higher resolutions.

    Hilbert may I ask whay no R9 390/390X on the charts this time? It would be interesting to see how they perform against RX 470/580/570/580.

    Performance difference between RX470/480 vs RX 570/580 is really weird, seems to me that AMD forget about RX 4xx optimisations in past Crimson ReLive drivers concerning Destiny 2 and they'll gonna fix that in next drivers, at least I hope so. Almost 13% performance difference between RX 480 vs RX 580 in F1 2017 was a bit suspicious as far as I'm concerned but this time performance difference between RX 4xx and RX 5xxx in Destiny 2 is just ridiculous.
     

  11. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    40,773
    Likes Received:
    9,183
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    I need to make choices at one point for reasons of time. Currently, there are already close to 20 cards in this tests. If I do the 390 series, Nvidia users will want 780 onwards and then the next one will ask 960 results and onwards ...
     
    CrazY_Milojko and airbud7 like this.
  12. CrazY_Milojko

    CrazY_Milojko Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,096
    Likes Received:
    420
    GPU:
    Asus STRIX 1070 OC
    OK, I understand. If you're willing for future game banchmarks exclude Fury Nano from charts and replace it with R9 390X, not many users are using it (and Fury & Fury X are still there on charts) and R9 390X is much more commonly used card compared to Fury Nano. Just a suggestion...
     
  13. BadAssMusician

    BadAssMusician Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 980Ti EGPU
    I'm hoping Guru3D adds some older and weaker graphics cards to their benchmarks like a GTX 750 that my big brother is running on in his primary system and a GTX 860M that is in my main laptop. And test on low settings then step it up to see for users, what is the bare requirement to run Destiny 2 and games like that. Not many would have the cash to step up from their own last gen GPUs.
     
  14. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,835
    Likes Received:
    4,744
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    He already test the 460/560 and the 1050 and these truly are budget cards starting @90 duck bones$
     
  15. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,161
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    GPU:
    -
    If review websites kept all the hardware they review, they'd have warehouses full of it. They can't keep everything, so why they would keep a GTX 750, when that's 3 years old, wouldn't make sense.

    If you're curious about an older, lower performance card, compare your card in some other review, if they exist, to a card that is in here. If the card you are reviewing is 120% faster on average then your current card, then you could probably say with decent certainty (though not absolute) that your card would play this game at that same difference.

    There's also websites, that can give you a rough estimate on what your card would compare to a card in this review, as an example:

    GTX 750 vs GTX 1050 ti
    http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-750-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1050-Ti/3162vs3649

    And

    GTX 860M vs GTX 1050ti
    http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-860M-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1050-Ti/m8647vs3649

    As well, there are websites such as:
    https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/requirements/destiny-2/15764
     
    airbud7 likes this.

  16. ubercake

    ubercake Master Guru

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    44
    GPU:
    EVGA 2080 Ti XC Blk
    In case anyone's curious, with an i7-3930K, GTX 1080 @1440p and "Highest" graphic detail settings, every time I look up at the in-game fps monitor, it's in the 70s fps while on planet during regular play. Occasionally it goes into the 60s fps and I noticed the cut scenes lock at 30. While in the spaceship off planet, it's around 160fps.

    Yeah... I'll be hanging on to my processor for a few more years.

    ---Update - 2017/10/31 ---
    I did experience frequent 50s fps on Nessus last night. Still at highest settings and it was still more than playable (probably thanks to G-sync tech). Not sure if it was due to server traffic or the complexity of the terrain or a CPU issue? I wish someone would include some of these older high-end CPUs in the benchmarks.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2017
  17. signex

    signex Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,788
    Likes Received:
    155
    GPU:
    NVIDIA GTX 1660 Ti
    Happens to me as well, tomorrow i receive my 1700x and will look if it made a difference or not.
    I noticed when i use resolution scale at around 125 or 150 my FPS doesn't seem to change, wich makes me think my 1500x is bottlenecking or something.

    Damn shame we can't use an overlay in this game.
     
  18. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    40,773
    Likes Received:
    9,183
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Our Destiny 2 performance analysis review has been updated. Both AMD and Nvidia now offer a driver that shows massive performance gains in Destiny 2. While AMD's optimized 17.11.2 driver already was included with huge performance increases, Nvidia did a similar thing with their 388.31 drivers. Nvidia also gains well over 30% in performance. All graphics cards have been retested, the charts have been updated to reflect this.

    Read the article right here.
     
  19. The Edge

    The Edge Active Member

    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    GTX 1660 Super
    It did, the article was just updated with the latest nvidia drivers, which hugely increased perf...
     
  20. AlmondMan

    AlmondMan Master Guru

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    137
    GPU:
    5700 XT Red Devil
    The huge performance increase was apparently something to do with depth of field, if you had it disabled you didn't notice anything.

    I'm running the game at 3440x1440 85% renderscale, highest settings on most things, no motionblur, no AA, no DoF and so on... getting 50-75 (75 cap) FPS generally on my RX 480... it only stoops as low as 50 on the really intensive areas like Io or whatever it is with the water storms.
     

Share This Page