Our first tests were run on low-end graphics cards from the Radeon HD 6450 and GeForce GT 630 GDDR5 to the Radeon R7 250X and GeForce GTX 650. We chose the minimum detail settings coupled with FXAA anti-aliasing at 1280x720.

The Radeon HD 6450 is unplayable, but the GeForce GT 630 GDDR5 and Radeon R7 240 squeeze out passable performance with 27- and 30-FPS minimums, respectively. AMD's Radeon R7 250X leads the budget pack, never dropping below 70 FPS.

Frame rates over time are fairly consistent with this class of graphics card. Nvidia's GeForce GTX 650 barely drops below the 60 FPS threshold, and the Radeon R7 250X remains above this chart's upper bound.


There's a significant amount of frame time variance, which manifests as occasional stutters on the affected cards. AMD's Radeon HD 6450 is affected most, though the Radeon R7 240 also suffers compared to the competition.
the most popular gaming cpu in the world.
Please could you include tests at 4K resolution, and also please use a real 780Ti and also a 295X2? Can you not ask another lab to do it, or get one shipped to you please?
+1 also on what @Patrick Tobin said.
I can appreciate that you might've spent a lot of time on this review, and we'd really appreciate you doing the final bit of this review. I know that not a lot of gamers currently game at 4K, but I am definitely interested in it please.
Thank you!
does the game utilize SLI or Crossfire setup on PC?
Techspot did include those and no difference between I5 and I7 not even lga2011 hexa core!
The game looks beautiful.
and then the FX-8350 against a freaking i7-3960X and NO OTHER intel CPU. [edited for language]
For freak sakes i am really trying to follow you as a serios tech-site without bias,
please do not make it any freaking harder for me.
edit: Actually someone did some nice tests for CPUS:
CPU performance with GTX 780
CPU performance with R9 290X
I hope there is a followup article, focusing on some specific details. These include VRAM limitations, and more tweaking to see which settings changes most affect not only raw FPS but also smoothness. It looks like some settings lead to a very distracting experience, and it would be nice to know what those are.
Edit: Thanks, Don, for adding the FX-6300 and i5-3550; those are useful numbers to have. Here is one title where the FX clearly beats the i3, so core count must matter.
Claiming something wins where 98% of us NEVER play is ridiculous. You want to know who wins in 98% of users cases. Those fps are too low for me anyway, as barely breaking 30fps min is not enough. You will see dips even on AMD while playing. They're only showing a snapshot here. They dropped textures to high at hardocp (the 2nd test) and NV won. So yeah if you want to push things to where we probably wouldn't enjoy it, AMD wins. Yay. But if you play at 1080p, the links above show NV winning. I think FAR more people are worried about 1080p. Having said that, this game would laugh at my PC...ROFL.