Battlefield V drops…well, in point of fact, when you get access to Battlefield V depends on when and how you bought it, with Origin Access Premiere customers already in-game, while people who actually buy the Deluxe version won’t receive it until November 15 and the standard edition doesn’t drop until November 20. This kind of staggered release claptrap is all part of the new Early Access model, but it means when you actually get to play Battlefield V really depends on when you buy it and what version you buy.
For the folks at home trying to figure out how well their GPUs can run the game in the first place, TechSpot has got you covered with a 38-GPU roundup on 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Apparently, testing wasn’t easy, with accounts being banned in several cases due to an inappropriate number of GPUs or something. The post is a little vague on this intriguing point — intriguing because I’ve never heard of a system being banned from logging in on the basis of hardware configuration changes before, and though it’s been a while, I’ve used both Battlefield 3 and BF4 for benchmarking in the past.
Check TechSpot for the full details, but the 1080p results are below:
I’ve picked 1080p to discuss because this is the resolution for which we have any kind of RTX/ray tracing performance information. In August, reports from Nvidia’s Gamescom RTX launch stated that the RTX 2080 Ti appeared to be working hard to maintain a 60fps target at 1080p. Now we have at least some idea what 1080p performance might look like.
If the RTX 2080 Ti still struggles to maintain that 60fps target, it means the impact of ray tracing could be truly heavy, given that the GPU puts up more than 180fps without ray tracing enabled. Of course, it’s also possible that DICE has either toned down their RTX implementation, allowing the RTX 2080 and RTX 2070 to catch up, or that further improvements to drivers and RTX implementation will allow the RTX 2080 and 2070 to run RTX at higher frame rates. Both improvements would result in the same net effect — a smaller performance hit when enabling this capability, increased flexibility on resolution scaling, and a better chance that gamers who can’t afford GPUs with four-digit price tags can enjoy the capability. That’s honestly what we’re hoping for, and we should know what the situation will look like in a few more weeks.
Past that, there aren’t many surprises here. One point that remains true throughout the stack is that AMD’s GPUs maintain strong performance parity with their equivalently priced and Nvidia counterparts at the high end and exceed them in the midrange. The Vega 64 stacks up well against the GTX 1080 / RTX 2070 at all resolutions, while the RX 580 is significantly faster than the 6GB GTX 1060 in 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. AMD’s RX 580 had an early lead over the GTX 1060 this summer and that still appears to be true today. That said, even low-end cards and older hardware like the GTX 960, GTX 1050 Ti, and 4GB RX 560 maintain frame rates above 40fps at 1080p. The Battlefield series has a reputation for being playable on a range of hardware and that remains true at 1080p, which is still the most common gaming resolution by a mile according to the Steam Hardware Survey.
There's another artifact, the Fury Nano is on par or -slightly- faster than the RX 580 in terms of power, yet performs far worse, nearly 25%. At worst it is about 25% faster than the 390X, yet it is 9% slower...We can see by the RX 580's performance that 4GB VRAM doesn't limit performance, so something definitely is going on. Something is going on with this card...
