Benchmarked: How Well Does Watch Dogs Run On your PC?

Features
By
published

Watch Dogs is one of the most anticipated games of 2014. So, we're testing it across a range of CPUs and graphics cards. By the end of today's story, you'll know what you need for playable performance. Spoiler: this game is surprisingly demanding!

Results: CPU Benchmarks

In order to explore CPU scaling, I used the overclocked GeForce GTX Titan on multiple platforms and the Ultra detail preset at 1080p.

Intel and, to a lesser extent, AMD will like this: even pushing the Ultra detail preset, Watch Dogs is a CPU-bound game. Ubisoft Montreal developed the PC version in concert with its console efforts, and optimizations for those platforms seems apparent. Programming for the PlayStation's and Xbox's host processors involves getting the most out of fairly lightweight platforms. Naturally, then, well-threaded desktop CPUs benefit strongly.

When it comes to gaming, we rarely see the FX-8350 outperform a Core i3. But AMD's flagship walks away with a clear win in that match-up. Based on what we're seeing, serious fans of the game will want an FX-6000-series chip at least, but an FX-8000 or Core i5 should be much better.

Low-end CPUs suffer most, as we'd expect, when frame time variance is measured. Both the FX-8350 and Core i7 exhibit a couple of spikes too, but they demonstrate much less variance on average.

Don Woligroski
258 Comments Comment from the forums
  • coolcole01
    Running on my system with ultra and highest settings and fxaa it is pretty steady at 60-70 fps with weird drops randomly almost perfectly to 30 then up to 60 almost like adaptive sync is on, Currently playing it withe the texture at high and hba0+ and smaa and its a pretty rock steady 60fps with vsync still with the random drops.
    Reply
  • coolcole01
    definitely does not like to run up the vram
    Reply
  • edwinjr
    why no core i5 3570k in the cpu benchmark section?
    the most popular gaming cpu in the world.
    Reply
  • chimera201
    So a Core i5 is enough compared to Ubisoft's recommended system requirement of i7 3770
    Reply
  • jonnyapps
    What speed is that 8350 tested at? Seems silly not to test OC'd as anyone on here with an 8350 will have it at at least 4.6
    Reply
  • Patrick Tobin
    Most 780Ti cards come with 3GB of ram, the Titan has 6GB. This is an unfair comparison as the Titan has more than ample VRAM. Get a real 780Ti or do not label it as such. HardOCP just did the same tests and the 290X destroyed the 780 since the FSAA + Ultra textures started causing swapping since it was pushing past 3GB.
    Reply
  • tomfreak
    If u dont have 780ti, 780, just show us stock Titan speed, Why would u rather show us Titan OCed speed than showing Titan stock speed & all that without showing 290X OCed speed? Infact an OCed Titan does not represent a 780Ti, because it has 6GB VRAM. Vram is a big deal in watchdog. So ur Oced titan does not look like 780ti nor a real titan.
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    Hi Don

    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!
    Reply
  • Lee Yong Quan
    why doesnt you have the high detail setting? and would a 7790 1gb perform the same as 260x 2gb in medium texture? if not which is better
    Reply
  • chimera201
    We need more variety of CPUs
    Reply