enfrdeplesuk
Search find 4120    tg2 f2 lin2 in2 X icon 3 y2  p2 tik steam2

Batman Arkham Knight - PC performance graphics benchmarks of Graphics Cards v 2.0

BASIC GAME INFORMATION

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 13 49 28 938

Year of construction: 2015
Genre: Action-adventure
developer: Rocksteady
Publisher: Warner Bros. interactive entertainment

BatmanAK sys

BATMAN™: Arkham Knight brings Rocksteady Studios' acclaimed Arkham trilogy to a close. The game was created specifically for next-gen platforms and features a unique version of the Batmobile. The appearance of this amazing machine has been awaited for a very long time. It is designed to organically complement the game mechanics and make the player truly feel like Batman - now he will be able to soar over the city and sweep through its streets with the wind. Which is very useful, because never before has Gotham been threatened with a danger of such magnitude - the shock finale of the series brings Batman together with the Scarecrow, who has returned to unite a gang of supervillains against him and finally deal with him.

Changes in the new patch

bat steam

Warner Bros. has released a long-awaited patch that fixes many bugs in the PC version of Batman: Arkham Knight. List of the most important changes:

-improved game performance;
-The list of graphic settings has been expanded;
-optimized use of RAM;
-fixed bugs related to low-resolution textures;
-improved graphics.

The first update only fixed the weather effects, but this time Warner Bros. and Rocksteady focused on performance. The creation of the PC version was not carried out by Rocksteady, but by a small third-party studio, Iron Galaxy Studios from Chicago. However, after a disastrous release on computers, Rocksteady took matters into its own hands and began to personally correct numerous shortcomings.

Despite this, Steam users still do not have the opportunity to buy the digital version of Batman: Arkham Knight: due to many technical errors, WB had to suspend sales some time after the release. 

Comparison of game build differences

The graphic settings in Batman Arkham Knight have increased slightly, so the game has begun to take on a more or less sane appearance:

1 menu 2 menu 

Below we have provided screenshots comparing the old and new versions of the game:

Comparison of game versions
bat 1 bat 1 2
bat 2 bat 2 2
bat 3 bat 3 2

The picture in both versions of the game is almost identical...

Texture quality comparison
low 1 hi 1
low 2 hi 2
low 3 hi 3
low 4 hi 4

We also compared the game quality with low and high textures, since this is a rather demanding option for the graphics memory subsystem. The difference is honestly very, very negligible...

TEST PART

Test configuration

test stands

Test bench No. 1 based on the Intel Socket 2011 platform v3

Test bench No. 2 based on the Intel Socket 2011 platform

Test bench No. 3 based on the Intel Socket 1155 platform

Test bench No. 4 based on the AMD Soket AM3+ platform

Test bench No. 5 based on the Intel Socket 1150 platform

Multimedia equipment

Dell U3010 Monitor 

Monitor ASUS PQ321QE 

Software configuration

Operating system

Windows  10 Pro

Graphics driver

Nvidia GeForce/ION Driver Release 355.82

AMD Catalyst 15.8

Monitoring program

MSI Afterburner v4.1

FRAPS

 
GPU test

All video cards were tested at maximum graphics quality using MSI Afterburner. The purpose of the test is to determine how video cards from different manufacturers behave under the same conditions. The average and minimum FPS were taken as performance indicators. Below is a video of the benchmark:    

Our video cards were tested at different screen sizes of 1920x1080, 2560x1600 and 3840x2160 at the maximum graphics quality settings allowed by Batman Arkham Knight, with and without PhysX effects enabled. On AMD video cards and when physics is accelerated by the CPU, PhysX settings are not available. Tests were carried out in 2 stages - with high and low texture settings.

SLI support was disabled in the game, but from these tandems you can see how a combination of two video cards works when the second card is used as a physics accelerator.

Low textures
Testing at 1920x1080 resolution

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 29 513 

Testing at maximum quality settings 1920x1200 PhysX off

1920 l  

With these settings acceptable FPS showed level video cards Radeon R7 260X or GeForce GTX 660. The optimal solutions would be Radeon R9 270 or GeForce GTX 6760.

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 38 901

Testing at maximum quality settings 1920x1200 PhysX on 

b 1920l 

With these settings, an acceptable FPS indicator was shown by video cards of the level GeForce GTX 950 and higher

Testing at 2560x1600 resolution

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 48 900  

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560x1600 PhysX off

2560 l 

With these settings an acceptable FPS indicator was shown by video cards of the Radeon HD 7950 or GeForce GTX 770 level. The optimal solutions would be the Radeon HD 7970 or GeForce GTX 780.

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 58 798

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560x1600 PhysX on

b 2560l 

With these settings, video cards of the GeForce GTX 780 level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solution would be the GeForce GTX 980.

Testing at 3840x2160 resolution

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 03 09 961   

Testing at maximum quality settings 3840x2160 PhysX off

3840 l 

With these settings, video cards of the Radeon R9 290 or GeForce GTX 780 Ti level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solutions will be GeForce GTX 980 and higher.

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 03 18 519

Testing at maximum quality settings 3840x2160 PhysX on

b 3840l 

With these settings, video cards of the GeForce GTX 980 level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solutions will be  GeForce GTX 980 Ti and above.

High textures

Testing at 1920x1080 resolution

 BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 31 883

Testing at maximum quality settings 1920x1200 PhysX off  

1920 hours 

With these settings, an acceptable FPS indicator was shown by video cards of the level Radeon HD 7950 or GeForce GTX 780. 

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 40 679

Testing at maximum quality settings 1920x1200 PhysX on 

 b 1920 h

With these settings, video cards of the GeForce GTX 780 level and higher showed an acceptable FPS.

Testing at 2560x1600 resolution

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 53 473 

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560x1600 PhysX off

 2560 hours

With these settings, video cards of the Radeon HD 7950 or GeForce GTX 780 level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solutions would be the Radeon R9 280X or GeForce GTX 780. 

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 03 03 280

Testing at maximum quality settings 2560x1600 PhysX on

 b 2560 h

With these settings, video cards of the GeForce GTX 780 level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solution would be the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. 

Testing at 3840x2160 resolution

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 03 13 352 

Testing at maximum quality settings 3840x2160 PhysX off

 3840 hours

With these settings, video cards of the Radeon R9 290 or GeForce GTX 780 Ti level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solutions would be the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. 

BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 03 22 914

Testing at maximum quality settings 3840x2160 PhysX on 

 b 3840 h

With these settings, video cards of the GeForce GTX 980 level showed an acceptable FPS. The optimal solutions will be  GeForce GTX 980 Ti and above. 

 

Testing of video memory consumed by the game was carried out by the program MSI Afterburner. The indicator was based on results on top video cards from AMD and NVIDIA with separate screen sizes 1920x1080 and 2560x1600 with different anti-aliasing settings.

Testing at maximum memory GPU quality settings

wow 

The video memory measurement indicator was taken at the end of the gaming benchmark. The recommended amount of video memory use with low textures for a resolution of 1920x1080 will be 3076 MB of video memory, for a resolution of 2560x1600 - 3076 MB of video memory, and for a resolution of 3840x2160 about 4096 MB of video memory. The recommended amount of video memory use with high textures for a resolution of 1920x1080 will be 4096 MB of video memory, for a resolution of 2560x1600 - 6144 MB of video memory, and for a resolution of 3840x2160 about 6144 MB of video memory. 

CPU test

 BatmanAK 2015 09 10 14 02 31 883

We tested processor dependence on 16 models of basic configurations that are relevant today. The test was carried out in those places where the value of video cards for the game is minimal and its load was less than 99%, this time at a resolution of 1920x1080 with maximum graphics quality settings. 

Testing at maximum quality settings 1920x1080

proz 

CPU performance in the gaming benchmark is sufficient for all models.

Loading of processor coresat maximum quality settings 1920x1080 Intel% 

intel 

Loading of processor cores at maximum quality settings 1920x1080 AMD% 

AMD 

Batman Arkham Knight is capable of supporting up to 8 computing threads, but fully utilizes 4 computing cores.

RAM test

The test was carried out on the basic configuration of Core i 7 5960X@4.6 GHz with 16GB DDR4 2400 MGz pre-installed memory. The entire used operational memory was taken as an indicator. The RAM test on the entire system was carried out on various test benches without launching third-party applications (browsers, etc.).

Testing the game's RAM consumption at various quality settings 

RAM 

As we can see, with various quality settings, the amount of RAM consumed in Batman Arkham Knight is at the level of 4000 megabytes.

Testing system RAM consumption  

ram2 

On a 6GB system, Batman Arkham Knight consumes about 5.7GB of RAM. In the presence of a system with 8 gigabytes, the RAM consumption of all RAM was 6.6 gigabytes. With a 16 GB system, the total memory consumption was almost 7.7 GB. And with 32 gigabytes of RAM, the system consumes 8.2 gigabytes of RAM.  

IRONSPONSORS
AMD_Radeon_Graphics_Logo GBT 03 nvidia
GAME SPONSORS
1s-softclab  EA Games_Logo_
 Wargaming   buka-logo
     
 



Rate our test  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rating 89% [102 vote(s)]


Rate the graphics  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rating 66% [125 vote(s)]


Evaluate optimization  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rating 34% [132 vote(s)]

People participating in this conversation

Comments (52)

This comment was made by the moderator on the site

SNOWon PS3/XBOX360, when they came out, the graphics of year 2 were better in FIFA, then as the consoles became outdated, everything became the other way around, although... I cut it on a curling iron 3 in 14 FIFA, the difference with PC is mainly in smoothing and anisotropy.

This comment was made by the moderator on the site

Nikitait's only the beginning: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HK9dDfJM6o[/ Url]

This comment was made by the moderator on the site

Damn, they really cut out the reflections! The version, as I understand it, is no different from PS4. However, I didn't expect it.

This comment was made by the moderator on the site

vector0rWell, yes. It’s a matter of taste, there’s no arguing here. I myself come from a village, and I have a different idea of ​​wildlife, forests, hills, etc. But I liked something about Max. And fps over 100 can’t help but make me happy: lol:

This comment was made by the moderator on the site

SNOWA matter of taste. I like the UE4 version, I don’t like harsh colors and high contrast, in redux all this is more competently selected. Well, fogs and haze can be observed in real nature if you go there at least sometimes. :-) I have often been in the forest before and not always everything is clear, smooth and green. We have a river in a lowland, along the banks there is a forest, and you can often see something like the one in the game. Of course there are no mountains, but there are hills. I won’t argue, sometimes in games this is done to save resources, but here they did a great job, not a negative thing. I even ran through it one more time.

Load more