Saturday, January 26th 2019

Anthem VIP Demo Benchmarked on all GeForce RTX & Vega Cards

Yesterday, EA launched the VIP demo for their highly anticipated title "Anthem". The VIP demo is only accessible to Origin Access subscribers or people who preordered. For the first hours after the demo launch, many players were plagued by servers crashes or "servers are full" messages. Looks like EA didn't anticipate the server load correctly, or the inrush of login attempts revealed a software bug that wasn't apparent with light load.

Things are running much better now, and we had time to run some Anthem benchmarks on a selection of graphics cards, from AMD and NVIDIA. We realized too late that even the Anthem Demo comes with a five activation limit, which gets triggered on every graphics card change. That's why we could only test eight cards so far.. we'll add more when the activations reset.
We benchmarked Anthem at Ultra settings in 1920x1080 (Full HD), 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 (4K). The drivers used were NVIDIA 417.71 WHQL and yesterday's AMD Radeon Adrenalin 19.1.2, which includes performance improvements for Anthem.

At 1080p, it looks like the game is running into a CPU bottleneck with our Core i7-8700K (note how the scores for RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti are very close together). It's also interesting how cards from AMD start out slower at lower resolution, but make up the gap to their NVIDIA counterparts as resolution is increased. It's only at 4K that Vega 64 matches RTX 2060 (something that would be expected for 1080p, when looking at results from recent GPU reviews).

We will add test results for more cards, such as the Radeon RX 570 and GeForce GTX 1060, after our activation limit is reset over the weekend.
Add your own comment

134 Comments on Anthem VIP Demo Benchmarked on all GeForce RTX & Vega Cards

#1
cucker tarlson
looks like cpu overhead on amd cards,may be resolved in drivers unless they drag their ass with solving it like they did in some many other dx11 games. matching a 2060 is where V64 is at so no surprises there. 1440p performance numbers look good,I'd be very glad to see my 1080Ti run at 100 fps.

I guess the amd driver was not game-ready for anthem after all.
Posted on Reply
#2
M2B
Anthem is a very demanding game and if you want to always maintain 60FPS at 1080p/Ultra you may need an RTX 2060.
For 1440p RTX 2080 and 1080Ti are sufficient and the only option for 4K is RTX 2080Ti @2GHz+/16Gbps~.

I'm a bit disappointed by the performance though, I couldn't get a consistent 60FPS on my GTX 1080 at 1440p. the overall look of the game is fine but it looks dated in some aspects.
Posted on Reply
#3
vMax65
Have to say, impressive from the RTX 2060 at both 1080p and 1440p...
Posted on Reply
#4
Nkd
AMD will probably have to do more optimizations.

Why no 1080 in the benchmarks?
Posted on Reply
#5
siluro818
Nkd
AMD will probably have to do more optimizations.

Why no 1080 in the benchmarks?
"We realized too late that even the Anthem Demo comes with a five activation limit, which gets triggered on every graphics card change."
Posted on Reply
#7
TheGuruStud
cucker tarlson
looks like cpu overhead on amd cards,may be resolved in drivers unless they drag their ass with solving it like they did in some many other dx11 games. matching a 2060 is where V64 is at so no surprises there. 1440p performance numbers look good,I'd be very glad to see my 1080Ti run at 100 fps.

I guess the amd driver was not game-ready for anthem after all.
You have this the wrong way around. Game devs need to fix their shit. Nvidia/AMD have been fixing their junk for far too long. If it were coded correctly, then there wouldn't be any issues and you wouldn't need a new driver to play a game. I guess everyone just forgets the 90s/early 00s. To make it worse, it's using Frostbite. Nothing should even have to be done for good performance all around.

Release is in a month and this is the state it's in? LOL. Another joke ruined by EA is what I see.
Posted on Reply
#8
Readlight
Dontexpect updates from ea for old games.you can buy but there will be only black screen.
Posted on Reply
#9
cucker tarlson
TheGuruStud
You have this the wrong way around. Game devs need to fix their shit. Nvidia/AMD have been fixing their junk for far too long. If it were coded correctly, then there wouldn't be any issues and you wouldn't need a new driver to play a game. I guess everyone just forgets the 90s/early 00s. To make it worse, it's using Frostbite. Nothing should even have to be done for good performance all around.

Release is in a month and this is the state it's in? LOL. Another joke ruined by EA is what I see.
I guess you forgot its not the 1990s anymore.
It runs very well on nvidia cards,amd just have to follow with another driver.If they followed your logic their cards would be a broken mess in most of current gen games.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheGuruStud
cucker tarlson
I guess you forgot its not the 1990s anymore.
It runs very well on nvidia cards,amd just have to follow with another driver.If they followed your logic their cards would be a broken mess in most of current gen games.
Yeah, I wonder who does that gimping to games with fat stacks of cash....

In case you're wondering, b/c you don't pay attention to anything, AMD has no trouble with frostbite. But bioware cocked it up, anyway.
Posted on Reply
#11
M2B
TheGuruStud
Yeah, I wonder who does that gimping to games with fat stacks of cash....

In case you're wondering, b/c you don't pay attention to anything, AMD has no trouble with frostbite. But bioware cocked it up, anyway.
The problem is that even in AMD sponsored titles such AC odyssey and RE2 Remake they kinda suck unfortunately.

Vega 64 is only half as fast as a 2080Ti at 4K.
Posted on Reply
#12
efikkan
Nkd
AMD will probably have to do more optimizations.
Well, that's always the thing with AMD's GPUs isn't it? We're always waiting for that big optimization to arrive and finally unleash the performance. I remember it was claimed at the launch of both Polaris and Vega; don't judge it yet - it will become much better over time!

Don't get me wrong, AMD should certainly prioritize making the best drivers possible, and there might be some marginal gains to be had here. But their focus on "optimizing" is by manipulating the games (which Nvidia also does), and I'm sure that if they reallocated these resources on actual driver optimizations, they could get some gains.

But still, any driver optimization to unlock a massive gain is highly unlikely.
Posted on Reply
#13
y0y0
M2B
The problem is that even in AMD sponsored titles such AC odyssey and RE2 Remake they kinda suck unfortunately.

Vega 64 is only half as fast as a 2080Ti at 4K.
it also costs 2.5x less...
Posted on Reply
#14
cucker tarlson
TheGuruStud
Yeah, I wonder who does that gimping to games with fat stacks of cash....

In case you're wondering, b/c you don't pay attention to anything, AMD has no trouble with frostbite. But bioware cocked it up, anyway.
I don't pay attention to AMD fanboys always having an excuse for every time the red team gets severly burnt.
They've had problems with dx11 overhead since I can remember myself running a 7870 and then r9 290 on an i5 2500k.In BF1 they only used their cards to the fullest in DX12. It shows here and they have to fix it.
Posted on Reply
#15
lexluthermiester
W1zzard
We realized too late that even the Anthem Demo comes with a five activation limit, which gets triggered on every graphics card change. That's why we could only test eight cards so far.. we'll add more when the activations reset.
Yet another example of lameduck, poorly implemented DRM making everyone's life more difficult than it needs to be. Not whining at you W1z, of course..

M2B
The problem is that even in AMD sponsored titles such AC odyssey and RE2 Remake they kinda suck unfortunately.
Radeon 7 is about to change that and Navi is inbound. AMD is going to spice things up this year!
Posted on Reply
#16
ArbitraryAffection
cucker tarlson
I guess the amd driver was not game-ready for anthem after all.
Yes, because 68+ fps is totally broken and unplayable.

I'm not interested in this game but if the 590 gets 68fps at 1080p, overclocked my 570 could get 60fps at least I think. Not terrible.
Posted on Reply
#17
Assimilator
Only EA could be incompetent enough to put an activation limit on a demo.
Posted on Reply
#18
cucker tarlson
ArbitraryAffection
Yes, because 68+ fps is totally broken and unplayable.

I'm not interested in this game but if the 590 gets 68fps at 1080p, overclocked my 570 could get 60fps at least I think. Not terrible.
oh that igonorance.....
I shouldn't even respond to this sort of baiting but look at 1070 and Vega 64 at 1080p. See,they're not usually equal.


Lol,I can't help myself laughing at how offended amd apologists got upon seeing these results and me saying that it needs a driver. sure,why not,let the driver team off the hook,why have them work on improving it when you can have even more fun complaining about it here.
Posted on Reply
#19
B-Real
M2B
The problem is that even in AMD sponsored titles such AC odyssey and RE2 Remake they kinda suck unfortunately.

Vega 64 is only half as fast as a 2080Ti at 4K.
I wouldn't say anything about RE2 results until Tpowerup-Guru3D-Techspot-Computerbase-PCGameshardware does a benchmark. And remember the results of Resident Evil 7, where AMD crushed its NV counterparts.
Posted on Reply
#20
ArbitraryAffection
cucker tarlson
oh that igonorance.....
I shouldn't even respond to this sort of baiting but look at 1070 and Vega 64. See,they're not usually equal.
Excuse me? There are games where Nvidia's architecture also does better than GCN. Also some where AMD does better. That's just the way it is, I am not baiting at all, please don't mis understand me as some low quality troll.

The AMD cards are providing playable experiences in the game at max settings, at least according to the Average FPS numbers. So the dig at AMD's driver is in itself low-quality bait. Jeeze there's some AMD hate on the internet. (fanboys).
Posted on Reply
#21
cucker tarlson
ArbitraryAffection
Excuse me? There are games where Nvidia's architecture also does better than GCN. Also some where AMD does better. That's just the way it is, I am not baiting at all, please don't mis understand me as some low quality troll.

The AMD cards are providing playable experiences in the game at max settings, at least according to the Average FPS numbers. So the dig at AMD's driver is in itself low-quality bait. Jeeze there's some AMD hate on the internet. (fanboys).
I hope your position changes when amd releses a driver to see 1080p/1440p performance improve.
Posted on Reply
#22
y0y0
this benchmark is obvious bullshit, this guy cant even get 100fps ONCE at 1080p with 2060 and 9900k, while TPU managed to get 108 AVERAGE, yea sure
Posted on Reply
#23
cucker tarlson
y0y0
this benchmark is obvious bullshit, this guy cant even get 100fps ONCE at 1080p with 2060 and 9900k, while TPU managed to get 108 AVERAGE, yea sure

have you thought of asking for driver versions before writing this bs ?
Posted on Reply
#24
y0y0
cucker tarlson
have you thought of asking for driver versions before writing this bs ?
30 fps more with driver updates, are you insane? he even has 9900K against 8700k in CPU-bound game, LMAO
Posted on Reply
#25
TheLostSwede
y0y0
30 fps more with driver updates, are you insane? he even has 9900K against 8700k in CPU-bound game, LMAO
Are you implying @W1zzard doesn't know what he's doing when benchmarking? Then I suggest you might want to depart this site rather quickly and rather quietly.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment