The new part of Far Cry pleased the players with a new portion of adventures in a large beautiful world. A nice picture requires powerful hardware, raising the question of choosing the optimal video card. And in this review, we will find out which AMD and NVIDIA graphics accelerators provide good performance at maximum graphics. Let’s compare budget models and top solutions. Let’s supplement the final data with a video comparison in resolutions from Full HD to 4K.
Far Cry 5 is based on the updated Dunia Engine 2 and runs under the DirectX 11 API. The game shows large detailed spaces. Relative to the previous parts, the lighting system has been improved, recreating the effect of directional volumetric light. It looks especially beautiful at dawn. Vegetation detail has also been improved. Relief texturing makes the surface of the earth, dirt and rocks look more voluminous. Looks like some tessellation is being applied.
The water looks great. Light waves on the surface and reliable reflections make it alive. Transparency depends on the viewing angle and lighting.
All this is implemented on the basis of a special water simulation system that uses Rapid Packed Math technology to speed up calculations on AMD GPUs.
Solutions from the top, middle and budget segments, including new generation models and old video cards, will take part in comparative testing. NVIDIA solutions are in the majority, for convenience we will place them at the top of the list.
The most powerful solution from NVIDIA will be the reference GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
ASUS CERBERUS-GTX1070TI-A8G introduces the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti series.
The GeForce GTX 1060 series is represented by the ASUS DUAL-GTX1060-6G accelerator. Due to the stable high Boost, the core frequency was reduced by 20 MHz to get closer to the results of the simplest solutions in this series.
From AMD’s side, the reference design Radeon RX Vega 64 is the top choice. Testing was done with stock BIOS in normal balanced mode (default settings).
Also in testing will take part Radeon RX Vega 56 by ASUS. This is the ROG Strix Radeon RX Vega 56 model, which has a slight overclock. Therefore, the video card was put into Quiet mode by switching to the second BIOS in order to achieve performance at the level of standard versions.
The Polaris architecture models represented by the Radeon RX 580 and Radeon RX 480 are presented by ASUS ROG-STRIX-RX580-O8G-GAMING with the appropriate frequency correction.
Full list of participants:
All video adapters were brought to standard frequencies to match the reference options. The Radeon R9 270X replaces the Radeon HD 7870 video adapter.
The participants have been tested at nominal and overclocked. In simple modes, older models are used only at standard frequencies.
The test bench configuration is as follows:
- processor: Intel Core i7-6950X (email@example.com GHz);
- cooler: Noctua NH-D15 (two NF-A15 PWM fans, 140 mm, 1300 rpm);
- motherboard: MSI X99S MPower (Intel X99);
- memory: G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ (4×8 GB, DDR4-3200, CL14-14-14-35);
- system disk: Kingston SSDNow KC400 (512 GB, SATA 6Gb/s);
- secondary drive: WD Red WD30EFRX (3 TB, SATA 6Gb/s, 5400 rpm);
- power supply: Seasonic SS-750KM (750 W);
- monitor: ASUS PB278Q (2560×1440, 27″);
- operating system: Windows 10 Pro x64;
- Radeon driver: AMD Adrenalin Edition 18.4.1;
- GeForce driver: NVIDIA GeForce 397.64.
For tests, a built-in benchmark was used, which was run seven times.
Maximum graphics quality for all resolutions.
At a resolution of 1920×1080, all budget video adapters show poor results. Although the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti gives out about 40 fps, and after overclocking 40-46 fps. An ordinary undemanding player will be completely satisfied with such performance. It is worth noting a good lead over the GeForce GTX 960. At the same time, among the 2 GB options, the old Radeon R9 270X looks good.
If you want to play at a higher frame rate, then you need mid-range solutions. And here the GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 480 are quite enough, which show an identical fps level. The Radeon RX 580 is nominally a little faster than its competitor NVIDIA, but in overclocking they have parity with the GeForce GTX 1060. The GeForce GTX 780 Ti looks weak against the background of the new models — the gap with the GeForce GTX 1060 is more than 30%. And this is clearly not due to the small amount of video memory, since the benchmark used 3 GB. In the older segment, we see a minimal gap between representatives of the Vega series, which is quite expected — these video adapters often reveal their potential at higher resolutions. But even the Radeon RX Vega 56 is faster than the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.
Let’s see how older graphics cards with higher resolutions will cope.
At 1440p, AMD representatives begin to show a clear advantage over direct competitors. The Radeon RX 480 is faster than the GeForce GTX 1060, not to mention the Radeon RX 580. The results of this trinity are not bad, but they cannot do without overclocking at such a high resolution. The Radeon RX Vega 56 holds the lead over the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti. Both competitors show over 70 fps even without overclocking. Radeon RX Vega 64 outperforms Radeon RX Vega 56 by 13%. The flagship GeForce GTX 1080 Ti outperforms the Radeon RX Vega 64 by up to 18%. Video memory loading during tests did not exceed 3.8 GB
Let’s compare older solutions in 4K.
The Radeon RX Vega 56 extends its lead over the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti. But both video adapters are rather weak for a resolution of 3840×2160. The Radeon RX Vega 64 shows sufficient performance, although drawdowns below 40 fps are possible, which will be noticeable. The GeForce GTX 1080 Ti shows an 18-20% advantage over the leader AMD, and when overclocked, it approaches the 60 fps mark. According to MSI Afterburner monitoring, the benchmark uses about 4.8 GB of VRAM, but in reality, the game can use large amounts. From the video at the end of the article, you can see that in the open world, memory loading in 4K is closer to 7-8 GB.
Let’s supplement the graphs of the results with videos in which you can compare the performance of video cards in dynamics, right during the benchmark. Monitoring of frequencies and loading of video memory using MSI Afterburner is involved. Video captured by NVIDIA ShadowPlay and AMD ReLive.
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1050, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti, GeForce GTX 1060 at 1920×1080:
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1060, Radeon RX 480, Radeon RX 580 at 1920×1080:
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1060, Radeon RX 580, GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, Radeon RX Vega 56 at 1920×1080:
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1060, Radeon RX 580, GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, Radeon RX Vega 56 at 2560×1440:
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1060, Radeon RX 480, Radeon RX 580 at 2560×1440:
Comparison of GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, Radeon RX Vega 56, Radeon RX Vega 64 at 2560×1440:
Performance comparison of Radeon RX Vega 64 and GeForce GTX 1080 Ti at 3840×2160:
In addition, a small demonstration of gameplay on the Radeon RX Vega 64 video card in 4K format:
Far Cry 5 pleases with a nice picture with beautiful landscapes with moderate system requirements. At a resolution of 1920×1080, a comfortable frame rate will be provided by the Radeon RX 580/480 and GeForce GTX 1060. With good overclocking or with a little tweaking of the settings, you can also play normally on the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti. At a high resolution of 2560×1440, the Radeon RX Vega 56 and GeForce GTX 1070 Ti show excellent results, although the undemanding user will still be satisfied with those Radeon RX 580 or GeForce GTX 1060. There is a general advantage of AMD solutions. Radeon video cards show the best results against the background of the nearest competitors of the GeForce line. This is true both for a pair of Radeon RX 580 and GeForce GTX 1060, and for Radeon RX Vega 56 with GeForce GTX 1070 Ti. Even in the budget segment, the old Radeon R9 270X beats the GeForce GTX 960.
If we talk about maximum performance, then the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is beyond competition, since AMD still has no analogues. GeForce GTX 1080 Ti allows you to play even in 4K resolution. The Radeon RX Vega 64 also handles this mode, but the demanding gamer will have to lower some parameters to achieve higher fps.