Resident Evil 7: Biohazard, Benchmarked

Long awaited by fans of the Resident Evil franchise, this seventh installment brings back basics that made the series so successful: wave goodbye to the action genre and say hello to survival/horror with a good dose of exploration, all in first-person. In short, everything is meant to scare you, even more so since the game is designed for VR, and available for Sony's PSVR.

WARNING: Before getting into specifics, the game's Mature 17+ rating is completely justified; numerous scenes may shock the sensitivity of many players!

From the technical side, Resident Evil 7: Biohazard is based on Capcom's new RE Engine. Forget about the first- and second-gen MT Framework foundation used to develop previous Resident Evil games. This is a new multi-platform engine (Windows, Xbox One, PS4) optimized to accelerate the development of future titles, and offer the best possible experience in and out of VR. We're only disappointed that Resident Evil 7 is not DirectX 12-enabled. On the flip side, it's playable in HDR if you have a compatible display.

Minimum and Recommended Configurations

Steam's page on Resident Evil 7 includes a list of minimum and recommended system requirements for play on a PC. The lowest-end configuration aims for at least 30 frames per second in Full HD (with texture quality compromises, since higher settings gobble up on-board memory), while the recommended hardware makes it possible to hit 60 FPS, also at 1920x1080.

Core i5-4460 or FX-6300
Core i7-3770
Graphics Card
GeForce GTX 760 or Radeon R7 260X (at least 2GB)
GeForce GTX 1060 (at least 3GB)
Operating System
Windows 7, 8, 8.1, 10 (64-bit only)
Windows 7, 8, 8.1, 10 (64-bit only)
Disk Space
DirectSound Compatible DirectSound Compatible

Radeon vs GeForce

While Resident Evil 7 is part of Nvidia's “The Way It's Meant to be Played” program, it's also optimized for current-gen consoles packed full of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. It's hard to imagine that one company or the other got a significant leg up, given the stakes.

GeForce GTX 1060GeForce GTX 1060Radeon RX 480Radeon RX 480

Based on our analysis, you can be sure that GeForce and Radeon cards serve up the same picture at comparable graphics settings, aside from a few small differences attributable to anti-aliasing algorithms. In the end, though, their output is otherwise identical.

Graphics Options: Highly Configurable

Capcom imbues the PC version of Resident Evil 7 with a large number of detail settings. The resolution is configurable, of course, but so is texture quality, texture filtering, mesh quality, anti-aliasing technology, effects, shadow quality, ambient occlusion, volumetric lighting, lens flares, reflection and diffusion quality, chromatic aberrations, and even color space.

Naturally, we wanted to gauge the picture quality difference with these settings turned off and on. The table below shows the three combinations of quality options we're using. All tests were then run at Full HD with the options cranked up as high as they go.

Texture Quality, Texture Filtering, Mesh Quality
Very Low
Very High
Effects Rendering
Shadow Quality
Very LowMedium
Very High
Dynamic Shadows
Ambient Occlusion
Volumetric Lighting Quality
Motion Blur, Bloom, Lens Flare, Reflections, Subsurface Scattering, Chromatic AberrationOff

Unsurprisingly, there's not much difference between our Medium and High modes. The middle configuration yields good texture quality at 1920x1080. At 1440p and 4K, you're better off using the Very High preset, even if that setting is quite a bit more demanding. You'll want a graphics card with plenty of on-board memory.

By reducing all of the options to their minimums, the quality drops noticeably.

Low QualityLow QualityMedium QualityMedium QualityHigh QualityHigh Quality

To better understand the picture quality with Resident Evil 7's detail settings dialed all of the way down, check out the image below and its artifacts on the walls, ground, ceiling, and objects around the room.

If you need to, we recommend dipping down to our Medium quality level for higher frame rates. Below that, expect the game experience to suffer quite a bit. Really, there are enough modifiable settings to dial in playable performance on almost any modern graphics card.

MORE: Best Graphics Cards

MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • Verrin
    Great analysis! I hope you guys do more game-specific benchmarks, I can't remember seeing them too often on here anymore. :)
  • shadowmaster625
    love those new frame time graphs!
  • stairmand
    Now they just need to fix bigger FOVs, extra wide monitors and multiscreen setups.
  • waltsmith
    Not being a fanboy for this comment, this certainly sounds like another example of Nvidia strong arming a game developer to only put the green team card on the recommended specs. This kind of stuff leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.
  • stairmand
    Now if only that would fix multi-screen, extra wide monitors and bigger FOVs. (anyone hoping that they already said they wont)
  • esco_sid
    Hmm wish had some analysis at 4k with gtx 1080
  • kiniku
    "Benchmarked" on only two middle-grade GPUs?
  • photonboy
    You talk about more memory usage on the RX-480 8GB vs GTX1060 6GB but don't state if that's a positive or negative. Was there a POINT to that?

    Tying in with that is CPU usage:
    "The difference in CPU utilization is noticeable, to AMD's advantage. This isn't particularly surprising for a console port."

    Since the GTX1060 6GB is using all 6GB's of it's memory it's quite possible that the higher CPU usage is due to memory swapping between system memory and video memory so I'd be careful about making specific points if you aren't certain of the reasons (or pointing out memory usage with no point made at all.. ).
  • MarkTech
    Worst RE of all, clearly a rip-off of Outlast, if you wnt truly survival horror packed with action, there is RE:2 and RE:3, still the best two games of the franchise
  • Shakershakar
    Worst RE of all, clearly a rip-off of Outlast, if you wnt truly survival horror packed with action, there is RE:2 and RE:3, still the best two games of the franchise

  • Piki__
    What a shocker, GTX 1060 uses less memory, because it runs out of it. Damn, and some people are happy with such mindless observations.
  • chimera201
    The colour graphs are kinda hard to make sense of in one glance.

    Maybe use something like:
    Black -------------> Worse
    Dark Grey
    Light Grey
    White ------------> Better
  • none12345
    Already a game using >6gb at 1080p? I did not think i would see that this soon. Luckily for the 1060(6g) it doesnt seem to cripple it, but that may not be the case for long. It does cripple the 3g version, which im not suprised to see at all. I feel sorry for the people who were duped into the 3gig 1060s; its only going to get worse.
  • Suiton20
    Is the game really considered a console port? It runs quite welll on plenty of hardware? Or is it nvidia fanboys saying that because amd somehow had an advantage on this nvidia title? But the 1060 6gb beat the 480 8gb by a lot. Maybe I'll get this game since it looks like it'll run great on my 390
  • fedpul
    I did not like this benchmark! There are things not tested like VRAM usage for example that is critical in this game. Also this game has really strange behaviours. Textures after Low does not change and the only thing it does if you crank up this setting is eating VRAM as crazy. Another setting that seems to present troubles besides Shadow Cache which is kinda useless, is Shadow Quality in Very High because it eats VRAM as crazy too. I have tested this game in a MSI Gaming GTX 970 @ 1400/1950 and with Textures set to Medium, Shadow Quality set to High and Shadow Cache off and it uses almost 3,5 GB VRAM all the time. Also at max settings when it fills your VRAM it starts to thing to RAM and the game can take up to 12 GB of RAM in 1080p. I do not know how long was your test run. But please try gaming for an hour or two with a 970 o 1060 3GB and you will see how the things I have said are true.
  • showp1984
    "Once again, we see maximum on-board memory usage is higher on the Radeon RX 480 than the GeForce GTX 1060 6GB. The former reaches ~7GB, while the latter approaches 6GB."

    This sounds linke you are trying to make a negative point towards AMD, or at least fail to point out the elephant in the Room, the 1060 6GB is worse in those two metrics. (in my opinion, and I am not a RedFanboy)

    The facts and conclusions behind both memory usage and CPU usage differences are:
    Memory: Ofc the 1060 !!6GB!! Does use less VRAM, it is maxed out! This is a BAD thing. The card basically has to swap to system memory at this point.
    CPU: Obviously CPU usage for the 1060 6GB will be higher because the card is swapping to system memory. The CPU has to carry that overhead back and forth. This is a symptom of the card being maxed out with it's VRAM.

    Conclusion: the 1060 has not enough VRAM and puts more strain on your CPU, which might not be equipped to handle that load. In that case it will cause frame drops at best and if the swapping task has a lower priority than the rendering pipeline it might even cause loading freezes, while the CPU swaps the data back and forth again.
  • germanlee42
    Just completed this game on 2560X1080 FreeSync monitor (LG 29UM67P) with the R9 390 all settings maxed. Didn't benchmark but can tell you gameplay was buttery smooth. Did wish for bigger FOV but the nature of the game (claustrophobic) is such that I didn't much miss it.
  • techy1966
    It is good to know my 390x's will play this game with ease then thank goodness for those 8GB frame buffers.