Home Articles Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Benchmark – 23 GPUs tested at 1080p, 1440p, & 4K!
  Previous Video Can The GTX 1050 Ti Outperform 2012's $500 Flagship GTX 680?
  Next Video The Best sub-$200 graphics card - GTX 1050 Ti vs. RX 470 / RX 460 4GB

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Benchmark – 23 GPUs tested at 1080p, 1440p, & 4K!

0
0

Introduction

It’s that time of year again, the time to milk the Call of Duty franchise for all it’s worth. Yet again we find ourselves with a futuristic shooter, but this time there’s a crazy twist, it’s in outer space.

Anyway I won’t rip on the game too much, the single player campaign actually looks pretty good, at least from what I have seen so far. The professional reviews also look mostly positive as well, though gamers themselves do seem to be having a blast tearing every aspect of the game to shreds, in Steam reviews and the like.

Quite a few of you have asked for a performance video showing how the current and previous generation AMD and Nvidia GPUs handle this new Call of Duty title. Well ask and you shall receive, I have tested 23 GPUs on our Core i7 test rig using the latest drivers from both teams.

By now I am sure you guys know the drill so before we get on with it here is a quick look at the quality settings used for testing. Essentially we have maxed out every quality setting, SMAA T2X was the anti-aliasing method used while the options that could be set to ultra and extra were.

Testing takes place at the start of the Black Sky mission and well rather than describe the run let’s just take a look.

Benchmarks

I’m not sure what’s been going on lately with AMD and their DirectX 11 performance but they have been kicking some serious goals. The GTX 960 just managed to deliver what we feel is acceptable performance while the R9 380 offers a much smoother experience at 1080p. Likewise the R9 390 was considerably better than the GTX 970.

Even at the top end of the food chain we see the Fury X is able to edge out the GTX 980 Ti, allowing it to rub transistors with the Titan X.

Moving to 1440p the R9 390X is required for a 60 fps average while Nvidia’s GTX 980 averaged 51 fps. The GTX 950 and 960 fall away to unplayable frame rates while the R9 380 and 380X hang in there. Again the Fury X can be found alongside the GTX 980 Ti and Titan X.

The previous generation GPUs struggle at 4K and while a few quality settings can be downgraded without impacting the visuals too heavily, we recommend gamers look to the current generation lineup for 4K gameplay.

Even with the current generation GPUs we find AMD has a significant performance advantage in this title. The RX 480 easily disposed of the GTX 1060, deliver 10% more performance at 1080p. Meanwhile the RX 470 was 55% faster than the new GTX 1050 Ti, so a bit of a slaying there then. Although both were very playable, it is crazy to see the GTX 1070 offering just 10% more performance than the RX 480.

Those wanting to game at 1440p can do with quite well with either the RX 470, 480 or GTX 1060. The 3GB 1060 did dip noticeably lower at times but issues such as stuttering didn’t exist. Impressively the RX 480 still averaged over 60fps at this resolution.

Ideally gamers will want the GTX 1080 for a smooth 4K gaming experience and if you can afford it the Titan XP is naturally the most powerful option here deliver almost 50% more performance than the GTX 1080.

Throwing the old together with the new we end us with this mess. The Fury X looks mighty impressive sitting alongside the GTX 1070 and as we saw previously the Maxwell Titan X. The new RX 470 has no trouble crushing the highly popular GTX 970 while almost matching the GTX 980.

At 1440p we find a few variations in performance. The RX 470 is now able to not just outclass the GTX 970 but also the GTX 980 and by a fairly significant margin I might add.

For now AMD lacks the GPU firepower to fight the 4K battle and although the Fury X did pull ahead of the GTX 1070, neither is really fast enough here. The GTX 1080 scrapes by while the Titan XP obliterates everything with its next level performance.

CPU Utilization

Like TitanFall 2 we find that Call of Duty Infinite Warfare isn’t particularly demanding on the CPU. Using our Core i7-6700K test rig, utilization rarely exceed 30% during both the single player and multiplayer portions of the game. Core i3 users have been reporting high frame rates and given what we have seen here I am not at all surprised.

Conclusion

Well the good news here is that gamers won’t require a hideously expensive graphics card [I’m looking at you Titan XP] to enjoy smooth consistent performance at resolutions up to 1440p.

The best value option by far looks to be the RX 470, though the GTX 1060 holds its own well enough. Optimization for the current and previous generation AMD GPUs is impressive and they really took it to the competing Maxwell and Pascal GPUs. Along with the mild GPU requirements the game will also run happily on a Core i5 or FX-series processor.

Of course we always expected 2016’s Call of Duty game to be relatively hardware friendly given the graphics aren’t anything special. Assuming the game was optimized well enough it was always going to run on mid-range hardware and thankfully this has been the case.

Graphically the game doesn’t look bad but it pales in comparison when compared to Battlefield 1 for example.

Well that wraps up our performance coverage of the latest in a very long line of Call of Duty games, Infinite Warfare being the 13th installment. At this point you really do have to wonder how many times a game can be recycled. So what do you guys think? Will you be investing your money in this title? I am very keen to hear what you have to say.

This has been Steve brining you another performance breakdown, I hope you enjoyed it!

Matt Knuppel Matt is a tech enthusiast, gym owner, and very part time gamer. In between making tech videos, he can be found watching the UFC, NBA, and AFL, as well as at music festivals and deep down rabbit holes on reddit.

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *