Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Diablo III Performance, Benchmarked

Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
May 7, 2012 4:37:58 AM

Nice to see my GF460 should play it at max settings.
Score
12
May 7, 2012 4:42:27 AM

Oh yes... The epic armageddon of all click-fest's is upon us! In 6 months time I'll bench 100kg with my index finger.
Score
36
Related resources
May 7, 2012 4:49:35 AM

So the CPU won't keep us from enjoying the game... nor the GPU... only the calendar then.
Score
29
May 7, 2012 5:18:19 AM

The calendar and your finger stamina :p 
Score
22
May 7, 2012 5:23:58 AM

i'm luvin it!
Score
-4
May 7, 2012 5:27:26 AM

"Like the originals, the isometric view remains locked in place, and zooming in is not an option."

Push Z
Score
23
May 7, 2012 5:37:58 AM

HD7870 is on par with GTX580! Now I understand why he didn't even take HD7970 into test. That would have been too embarrassing for nvidia.
Score
-20
May 7, 2012 5:38:50 AM

Note that amd 12.4 artifacts doesn't only apply for Diablo 3 alone I got artifact in any game with my 3650 so I have to revert to 12.3
Score
11
Anonymous
May 7, 2012 6:03:11 AM

so can anyone recommend a good laptop that can play this no lag for under 800?
Score
6
May 7, 2012 6:10:29 AM

I had a lot of fun with it in the beta. I still cant say Im going to be a fan of the RMT Auction House, but other then that, its a fun game. Between this and Guild Wars 2, Im gonna have a very unproductive summer :D 
Score
6
May 7, 2012 6:16:55 AM

I would have liked to see a HD7750 in there, as that would be the easiest upgrade for someone who wanted a cheap card with low power draw. It's a bit hard to predict where it'll end up because the HD6850/HD6770 anomaly.
Score
13
May 7, 2012 6:34:45 AM

Were any large fights present in the FPS recording? Because of the computers ive tested ive noticed computers with slower CPUs, especially dual cores, would get quite choppy during large fights and all the ragdolls flying everywhere. This problem seemed to either vanish or greatly diminish when physics were changed from high to low. Perhaps the physics are handled by the cpu? If so, this means the cpu testing results may not be a good measure of real world use of the game.
Score
17
May 7, 2012 6:39:42 AM

cinergyHD7870 is on par with GTX580! Now I understand why he didn't even take HD7970 into test. That would have been too embarrassing for nvidia.


Hardly, Nvidia is the only party that provides extra gfx quality via ambient occlusion for this title and with all thoose monster cards available today i rather use that extra power to get better quality than let it go wasted. So even if i dont get 500+ fps in 2560x1600 with 2x680 sli i do get ambient occlusion as well as insanly good AA making the title look nice. I play the game to enjoy it, not benchmark it!
Score
8
May 7, 2012 6:47:08 AM

I still use a 9600GT, anyone have any idea how it would work with that?
Score
5
May 7, 2012 6:50:20 AM

"At 1080p, the Radeon HD 6540 might be considered playable,"

Don't you mean the 6450?
Score
16
May 7, 2012 6:52:37 AM

gnookergiI still use a 9600GT, anyone have any idea how it would work with that?


Not well, if it works at all (which I doubt).
Score
-10
May 7, 2012 6:55:13 AM

courtlandbso can anyone recommend a good laptop that can play this no lag for under 800?


A laptop with an A6 or A8 and a 7470 in CF or something similar should do it very well. I know that HP sells those for under $650 and depending on whether or not it's on sale, even cheaper. You could probably get something similar even cheaper elsewhere (HP isn't known for being the cheapest, not even among other OEMs).
Score
3
May 7, 2012 7:08:17 AM

This article will need another go once the game comes out. You have to have something a bit more taxing than this.
Score
7
May 7, 2012 7:10:06 AM

I've got a GTS450. Maybe I should be looking somewhere between the HD 6670 and GTX 550Ti..
Score
5
May 7, 2012 7:11:23 AM

gnookergiI still use a 9600GT, anyone have any idea how it would work with that?

Well you can perhaps look somewhere around the GT440 or the HD 6670 but don't expect the same FPS.
Score
4
May 7, 2012 7:13:16 AM

How well does the game run under a quad SLI setup with 2 GTX 690's (overclockked)?

anyway, it seems like it will run on a mid range laptop so it can make boring lectures more interesting.
Score
-7
May 7, 2012 7:32:59 AM

I'm happy. My Phenom II X4 980 will run it as fast as an i5-2500k.
Score
5
May 7, 2012 7:37:17 AM

Which video card were you using for the CPU benchmarks?
Score
2
May 7, 2012 7:38:52 AM

Not too shocked about it knowing blizzard, but I am glad my setup will perform at the 100+ frames, a little sad was hoping it would stress my system to where it would encourage me more to get my current build thats on hold more traction but ehh i will just put it on hold for now..
Score
3
May 7, 2012 8:03:20 AM

Also, it would be interesting to see how well Llano would do with its on chip graphs for D3 since the HD 6550D is very comparable to the HD 6450.
Score
5
May 7, 2012 8:14:47 AM

My Logitech mice has a worn left click. Sometimes, I click once and it clicks twice instead. I guess this defect will be a PLUS in Diablo III
Score
2
Anonymous
May 7, 2012 8:25:43 AM

Please note: With certain Graphic cards you have to revert all the way to 12.0 Drivers :( 
(HD3650 for example)
Score
0
May 7, 2012 8:26:55 AM

Look at the way the skill tree has been simplified and the gameplay overall is simpler than DII (no portal book or identify book for example).

Now add in the ease with which low capability systems handle this title.

It is clear that Diablo III has been optimised for a console. Just because there is no simultaneous release for a console does not mean that the design requirements for one were not incorporated early on. The knock on effect is that lower end hardware can produce an enjoyable experience on the PC.

In general I think this is a good thing with only a tinge of disappointment that there could have been more, especially in the skill choice complexity.

Q
Score
1
May 7, 2012 8:36:04 AM

No comments on CF and SLI scaling? It's almost too good.
Score
0
May 7, 2012 8:59:54 AM

GichNo comments on CF and SLI scaling? It's almost too good.

The charts include the 460SLI and 6850xfire. According to the graph, @ 1080p scaling seems to be more than double for SLI (62 to 130fps? Are we sure about that?) and right around double in crossfire.
With 2 GTX 680s I was getting around 320fps on average in single player and 260s with 4 players in multiplayer during the beta test at 1080p. The lowest I saw it dip to was to 170fps. I didn't try it with one card, but the performance is so ridiculous in SLI with anything beyond what's in the charts here it doesn't even need to be included. Look at the performance of the any of the mid-level (6850 and above) gaming cards @ 1080p. They are even cranking out great framerates easily above the 60 mark in 1080p.
Score
5
May 7, 2012 9:43:15 AM

Flying-QLook at the way the skill tree has been simplified and the gameplay overall is simpler than DII (no portal book or identify book for example).Now add in the ease with which low capability systems handle this title.It is clear that Diablo III has been optimised for a console. Just because there is no simultaneous release for a console does not mean that the design requirements for one were not incorporated early on. The knock on effect is that lower end hardware can produce an enjoyable experience on the PC.In general I think this is a good thing with only a tinge of disappointment that there could have been more, especially in the skill choice complexity.Q


town portal and identify were two of the stupidest things they could have brought to the third game. all they really did for ANYONE who played the game a bit was take up what, 4 inventory slots.

now tell me, an expert in fighting, do you think they could at the very least make a judgement call on item quality?

and running the game on low end hardware... how many people do you think have high end hardware? i hate it when people complain about a good engine because it runs well even on lower hardware... do you really what another crysis situation where is so poorly optomized that its unplayable for years at the high end? im glad that the days of future thinking are over "lets add this to the game... what todays hardware cant play it... well future hardware will... because we are thinking of future hardware, we dont have to trim the code anymore, let it bloat, the future can handle it" and sadly that was the way many games were made years ago, crysis to my knowledge was the last one to do that.

and one last thing, these diablo like games play FAR better on consoles than on the pc, look at the ps2 everquest games if you dont believe me, i would welcome well integrated controller support.

i have to say, i thought that a comment like this persons would pop up far sooner than it did.
Score
-4
May 7, 2012 9:49:03 AM

ubercakeThe charts include the 460SLI and 6850xfire. According to the graph, @ 1080p scaling seems to be more than double for SLI (62 to 130fps? Are we sure about that?) and right around double in crossfire.With 2 GTX 680s I was getting around 320fps on average in single player and 260s with 4 players in multiplayer during the beta test at 1080p. The lowest I saw it dip to was to 170fps. I didn't try it with one card, but the performance is so ridiculous in SLI with anything beyond what's in the charts here it doesn't even need to be included. Look at the performance of the any of the mid-level (6850 and above) gaming cards @ 1080p. They are even cranking out great framerates easily above the 60 mark in 1080p.


Have a the same gfx set-up beside playing at 2560x1600, enabled high quality ambient occlusion with the SLI AA modes rather than use all that extra power for extra fps over 100 to no use.
Score
0
May 7, 2012 10:06:02 AM

gnookergiI still use a 9600GT, anyone have any idea how it would work with that?

Gman450Well you can perhaps look somewhere around the GT440 or the HD 6670 but don't expect the same FPS.

I second this. FPS should be closer to the 6670. Own a 9600GT too, surprised it's still useful, though it needs an overclock a lot of times :D 
Score
2
Anonymous
May 7, 2012 10:08:27 AM

what's the point in benchmarking game in place where nothing's happening?
Score
1
May 7, 2012 10:18:59 AM

schnitterMy Logitech mice has a worn left click. Sometimes, I click once and it clicks twice instead. I guess this defect will be a PLUS in Diablo III


Send their customer support a mail. I did that and they replaced it with a brand new one (better model since my old one was discontinued.) I love Logitech customer support.
Score
4
May 7, 2012 10:25:02 AM

To the people complaining about the RMAH. Diablo 2 was plagued with sites that would sell you items for money (no need to mention names.. everyone who has played diablo enough knows what i mean). I guess Blizzard thought that if they can't find an efficient way to stop that from happening , at least provide the players with an "official" alternative.

So don't act like money for items is something new to the diablo community.
Score
1
May 7, 2012 10:33:51 AM

sounds like what we really need is a mouse benchmark for the game instead of a system bench :) 
Score
8
May 7, 2012 10:38:30 AM

As the game is not very demanding.... how does this run on Intel HD 2k/3k/4k graphics?
Score
15
May 7, 2012 10:53:40 AM

It looks great and it runs great. That's the way all PC games should be. Good job Blizzard.
Score
0
May 7, 2012 11:03:00 AM

This likely doesn't take into account 4x players on the screen with all the effects turned up. It's likely once you get into multi player the performance will take a hit - but the game still won't require a beefy rig to run.

Score
2
May 7, 2012 11:51:08 AM

I can't believe how awful the 210 runs it at. Glad I upgraded from that to a 6850.
Score
0
May 7, 2012 11:55:54 AM

If your specific video card isn't listed, and you want a good idea of what to expect, I suggest you go to a Tomshardware graphics card recommendation article and look up where your card places on the chart at the end.

;) 
Score
1
May 7, 2012 12:22:03 PM

i had no issue playing the beta maxed out on my 9600gt.
Score
0
May 7, 2012 12:26:04 PM

alidantown portal and identify were two of the stupidest things they could have brought to the third game. all they really did for ANYONE who played the game a bit was take up what, 4 inventory slots.now tell me, an expert in fighting, do you think they could at the very least make a judgement call on item quality? and running the game on low end hardware... how many people do you think have high end hardware? i hate it when people complain about a good engine because it runs well even on lower hardware... do you really what another crysis situation where is so poorly optomized that its unplayable for years at the high end? im glad that the days of future thinking are over "lets add this to the game... what todays hardware cant play it... well future hardware will... because we are thinking of future hardware, we dont have to trim the code anymore, let it bloat, the future can handle it" and sadly that was the way many games were made years ago, crysis to my knowledge was the last one to do that.and one last thing, these diablo like games play FAR better on consoles than on the pc, look at the ps2 everquest games if you dont believe me, i would welcome well integrated controller support. i have to say, i thought that a comment like this persons would pop up far sooner than it did.

Did you actually read my post?

You appear to be arguing how bad my comments are whilst simultaneously agreeing with me.
Score
5
May 7, 2012 12:32:20 PM

I wish I had seen this. I have recently upgraded my PC to play D3. I ended up buying a 256bit GTX460 to replace my 5750. If the 5770 can top the GTX460 in this game, I'll have to put my old 5750 back in to see how it does. Looks like I've got some digging to do and will try to report back what the difference is.

Quote:
It seems that time, low resolutions, and antiquated visuals do not stand in the way of sublime game play.


We know that EA has ignored this for years now, I hope that Blizzard hasn't forgot.
Score
2
May 7, 2012 12:46:58 PM

6770 anomaly = what a blessing for 5770/6770 user.......... :D 
Score
4
May 7, 2012 12:57:15 PM

Glad to see my 3 yr old rig will run this at high settings with no issues! :D 

Thanks Blizzard!

Score
1
Anonymous
May 7, 2012 1:01:28 PM

Good article, the part where you tested the CPUs was quite enlightening.

I have a request is possible, could we have this test on mobile graphics? By the looks of things HD3000 & HD4000 should be fast enough, the latter maybe with some details. Or maybe include the tests for the A10 launch...
Score
3
May 7, 2012 1:06:00 PM

rantocHave a the same gfx set-up beside playing at 2560x1600, enabled high quality ambient occlusion with the SLI AA modes rather than use all that extra power for extra fps over 100 to no use.

I didn't even consider that. Good advice.
Score
0
!