The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Review
by Ryan Smith on May 31, 2015 6:00 PM ESTBattlefield 4
Kicking off our benchmark suite is Battlefield 4, DICE’s 2013 multiplayer military shooter. After a rocky start, Battlefield 4 has since become a challenging game in its own right and a showcase title for low-level graphics APIs. As these benchmarks are from single player mode, based on our experiences our rule of thumb here is that multiplayer framerates will dip to half our single player framerates, which means a card needs to be able to average at least 60fps if it’s to be able to hold up in multiplayer.
Battlefield 4 is going to set the pace for the rest of this review. In our introduction we talked about how the GTX 980 Ti may as well be the GTX Titan X, and this is one such example why. With a framerate deficit of no more than 3% in this benchmark, the difference between the two cards is just outside the range of standard run-to-run experimental variation that we see in our benchmarking process. So yes, it really is that fast.
In any case, after stripping away the Frostbite engine’s expensive (and not wholly effective) MSAA, what we’re left with for BF4 at 4K with Ultra quality puts the 980 Ti in a pretty good light. At 56.5fps it’s not quite up to the 60fps mark, but it comes very close, close enough that the GTX 980 Ti should be able to stay above 30fps virtually the entire time, and never drop too far below 30fps in even the worst case scenario. Alternatively, dropping to Medium quality should give the card plenty of headroom, with an average framerate of 91.8fps meaning even the lowest framerate never drops below 45fps.
Meanwhile our other significant comparison here is the GTX 980, which just saw its price cut by $50 to $499 to make room for the GTX 980 Ti. At $649 the GTX 980 Ti ideally should be 30% faster to justify its 30% higher price tag; here it’s almost exactly on that mark, fluctuating between a 28% and 32% lead depending on the resolution and settings.
Finally, shifting gears for a moment, gamers looking for the ultimate 1440p card will not be disappointed. GTX 980 Ti will not get to 120fps here (it won’t even come close), but at 77.7fps it’s well suited for driving 1440p144 displays. In fact and GTX Titan X are the single-GPU cards to do better than 60fps at this resolution.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
290 Comments
View All Comments
jjj - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
lol they got way high margins on the big cards ,they could sell this easily at 500$ (where perf per price would be close to the 970) and have good margins, if AMD has the big enough card, all they need is to want to be price competitive.These are not products for people that look for reasonable value, nobody that looks for that would ever pay 500$ for a GPU to begin with so both AMD and Nvidia are just keeping the high margins since volumes can't really go up.
Yojimbo - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
I don't know how you can say the value is unreasonable when there is no other way to achieve what these cards achieve. The high end of the graphics market is less sensitive to price than more mainstream segments. Both AMD and NVIDIA are trying to maximize their profits over the entire market range.jjj - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link
You seem to not understand the term value and then you explain why the high end cards are poor value.Value and competitiveness are 2 different things. One is perf per price and the other is how the product relates to it's competitors. Yes the high end is less price sensitive (something my first comment agreed with) and the cards are poor value that's why i found it amusing that someone thinks the perf per price is great, when it never is in the category.
Daroller - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
"You do not seem to don't understand the term value, and then you explain why the high end cards are poor value."Oh, that's rich.
Value in this case is a subjective term. Each consumer defines the value of a product to them. It isn't something you can put on a chart, or quantify, unless that's how they choose to define it for themselves.
I own two TITAN X in SLI to drive a 1440p display. You'd probably call that "poor value". You'd be correct... for yourself. You'd be woefully incorrect if we're discussing what I consider "value", because I considered the price/performance ratio to be perfectly acceptable, and moreover, a "good deal" to eliminate all possibility of VRAM related stuttering. All this while giving me the same number of shader cores as a tri-SLI 980 setup with better scaling because it's only two cards. A resounding value in my books.
Refuge - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
lol, you lost all credibility with anyone here after you said you were using Titan X's in SLI because you are worried about running out of VRAM and stuttering...I wouldn't call that poor value, I would just call that retarded.
Yojimbo - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
And yet despite his lack of "credibility" everything he said was completely correct. What does that say about your ability to judge?Kutark - Monday, June 1, 2015 - link
This whole thread could have been fixed if the guy said "objectively" instead of just "value".Yes, what constitutes a good value varies from person to person. Anyone with a brain can infer what he was trying to say in his argument, which is absolutely correct, is that at this price bracket, people aren't buying cards based on price/perf. So, whether or not the price/perf is comparable to lower cards is irrelevant. They price according to what the market will be bear. If they're selling them as fast as they can make them, then they're selling them at the right price.
Yojimbo - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
No. Especially since he replied back to me and ridiculed me for not knowing what "value" is. That by itself is enough of a refutation of your "just try to guess what he meant" argument. But if he really did mean what you think he did, his post is irrelevant, because value is the proper metric, and it is not "objective". That really is the entire point, and why something needed to be said.Yojimbo - Tuesday, June 2, 2015 - link
And one more thing. The fact that they aren't buying the cards to maximize "price/perf" is blatantly obvious, and just as blatantly irrelevant. The problem I'm having is, and I could be wrong here, that you and he both seem to be convinced they SHOULD be buying the cards on "price/perf."mapesdhs - Wednesday, June 3, 2015 - link
I'd buy you a beer for posting that if I could. 8) It's the perfect summation of what I've said so often, namely an item is only ever worth what someone is willing to pay. It's funny how people can get so offended that someone else can afford and is happy to buy a far better config than they do; really it's just hidden jealousy IMO. Either way, kudos for that rig, and please post some 3DMark bench links! 8) Actually, you should buy the beer, you can afford it, hehe...I wonder if you have a similar MO to me, I like to max out visual settings for the games I play, modding if need be to improve visuals. I hate scenery popping, etc.