Quantum Break PC Performance Review

4K Testing with AMD R9 Fury X and Nvidia GTX 980Ti

Quantum Break PC Performance Review

4K Testing with AMD R9 Fury X and Nvidia GTX 980Ti

 

At 4K we can finally get this game into a workload that actually gives our GPUs a significant workout at anything below Ultra settings before we run into CPU limitations. 

We can see again that the results at the lowest in-game settings are very similar to what we see at both 1080p and 1440p, meaning that these results are still fairly CPU limited, but we do see that the addition of AA only when moving to Low settings results in quite a significant framerate drop. 

The framerate drop when moving from Quantum Break's Lowest settings to it's Low preset is the exact reason why I had questioned earlier in this review why Remedy had decided to enable this option so low in the games graphical presets, as Remedy themselves say that the Option is 4xMSAA which is a very demanding form of AA. 

At 4K with the R9 Fury X and GTX 980Ti Quantum Break is completely playable at low settings if you can play at either a locked 30FPS or withstand the jumps from 30-60FPS with V-Sync on. At medium things get a little more tricky, with the framerate getting harder to stick to 30FPS, though only AMD's R9 Fury X makes the drop below it, though only briefly at the 0.1% percentile.  

Playing at 4K I would say to play the game at the medium preset and turn off AA, as this should allow both GPUS to stay above 30FPS at all times.  

At the lower settings both the AMD R9 Fury X and the GTX 980Ti both perform similarly, but we can see when moving up the setting that AMD quickly falls behind Nvidia, though right now we do not know if this is a driver issue or a patchable game issue. Either way the game is only really playable at 4K at medium or lower, which works fine on both GPUs most of the time. 

 

Quantum Break PC Performance Review  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next»

Most Recent Comments

07-04-2016, 13:54:34

AngryGoldfish
For every GTA V, Shadow of Mordor, and Mad Max, with great gameplay, limited bugs and superb performance scaling, there is a Syndicate, Quantum Break, and Gears of War.Quote

07-04-2016, 16:36:19

Mysterae
Nice write up.

I'm convinced this is a game with a couple of purposes. Firstly, to get Xbone users to try it on their computers as well, to either convince them that PC's are crap or to show them what's better on the PC. They failed at the latter.
Secondly, it's an experiment with UWP on the masses, to see if we will swallow this ****.


You have an important typo on the third page that gave me a glimmer of hope, but alas it's not true - ".. which is a shame since this game has now SLI or Crossfire support".Quote

08-04-2016, 06:10:35

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mysterae View Post
Nice write up.

I'm convinced this is a game with a couple of purposes. Firstly, to get Xbone users to try it on their computers as well, to either convince them that PC's are crap or to show them what's better on the PC. They failed at the latter.
Secondly, it's an experiment with UWP on the masses, to see if we will swallow this ****.


You have an important typo on the third page that gave me a glimmer of hope, but alas it's not true - ".. which is a shame since this game has now SLI or Crossfire support".
Typo fixed, thanks for the spot.

A lot of extra work went into this one, especially when it came to getting benchmarking data. I like the idea of percentile based framerate data, which is something that I will be looking more into for the future.Quote

08-04-2016, 07:00:39

SimplexPL
Quote:
While there has been a lot of talk on the internet about the "terrible" PC performance of Quantum Break I can say that these reports have been exaggerated
(...)
Sadly on my system I was unable to get the game to run at a solid 60FPS, regardless of the GPU that I used (...) which is a very strange prospect given that I was playing Quantum Break from an SSD on a system with an overclocked i7 6700K CPU and 16GB of 3200MHz DDR4 memory.
So you were unable to run at solid 60fps at 1080p (which is effectively 720p if NeoGAF is to be believed) at lowest settings on "overclocked i7 6700K CPU and 16GB of 3200MHz DDR4 memory" and a 980Ti/Fury, yet reports that the game runs terribly are "exaggerated"?
This game runs terribly, period.

Not being able to sustain 60fps at the lowest graphical settings at 1080p (reprojected 720p) on a fastest possible CPU, memory and GPU means, that the talk on the internet about the "terrible" PC performance is accurate, not exaggerated. What is the last AAA game that run that badly?Quote

08-04-2016, 10:05:08

Primey
What a bloody mess of a gameQuote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.