Batman: Arkham Origins PC Benchmark Performance Milos Milosevic October 25, 2013 Benchmarks Previous Batman predecessors Batman: Arkham Asylum and Batman: Arkham City had chronological order, this title however does not take place after Arkham City, but 5 years before the 2009 title Arkham Asylum, where batman is a greenhorn superhero with an attitude. Since developers nowadays are not familiar with chronology you will often find your self in weird situations where offspring are predecessors to their ancestors. Big hype has been surrounding this game, Warner Bros has employed top-dog voice actors for this game, Roger Craig Smith as Batman (also known as the actor who gave voice to Ezio Auditore from the Assassins Creed franchise) and Troy Baker as the Joker, a rising star who has made a name for him self voice acting in many games, such as Bioshock Infinite and The Last Of Us. If Warner Bros delivered what they marketed is another question and it may be addressed in some of our future articles. But enough about the game, this is a benchmark . Since 2009 Nvidia has always worked close with the developers of Batman, whether it was RockSteady Studios or WB Montreal, Nvidia was always there (and now here) to support this game with the green company’s features such as PhysX (features Batman series had since the beginning) and TXAA. Since this is one of those “The way it’s meant to be played” titles, someone would expect that the game will run better on Nvidia cards, lets find out how right that someone would be. Systems Requirements by Warner Bros Testing Systems CPU i7 4770K – i5 4670K FX 8350 – FX6300 – FX4300 Motherboard Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5, Asus Gryphon Z87 RAM 2x 8GB@ 2133 Mhz Kingston HyperX Beast : KHX21C11T3K2/16X HDD/SSD 2 x Intel 520 Series 240 GB GPU GTX770 4GB , GTX660 , 7970GHZ Edition, 7870 GHZ Edition Monitor Shimian QH270-IPSMS 2560x1440p 27″ PSU Thermaltake ToughPower XT 775W OS Windows 7 Drivers AMD Catalyst 13.11 Beta V1, Nvidia ForceWare 331.40-331.58 2560 x 1440, MSAA x8 Of course as soon as we installed the game we bumped up the graphics to maximum settings, however as soon as we started playing (we started with the AMD 7970 GHZ Edition) we noticed insanely low fps. This game does look good and we can say that its pretty demanding, however nothing in this game looked that good that it would justify such bad frame rates. When we switched to the GTX 770 everything changed as you can see. The GTX 770 gives 3x more frames than the 7970 on maximum settings at a 2560 x 1440p resolution. We tried with various ATI Catalyst drivers but nothing really worked as we are guessing its either video card drivers or someone just sabotaged AMD cards. Just 16 fps in average really says it all… GPU usage was 99% all of the time while testing however the game apparently wasn’t using GPU resources properly. On the other hand when it comes to CPU usage the game uses only 4 cores/threads and basically any quad core that you have will probably do a great job for this game (as long as you have an Nvidia card that is). The game as we said is using only 4 cores or threads but utilization of those cores was somewhere around the 50-60% mark most of the time. When we started comparing data gathered while testing CPU usage of various CPU’s with both of these cards there were actually some very interesting things we discovered. Apparently the game just isn’t optimized to use AMD GPU’s properly. If you switch from a GTX 770 to the AMD 7970 GHz Edition, CPU usage with AMD cards will double. 2560 x 1440, FXAA High 2560 x 1440, FXAA High, Gtx770 2560 x 1440, FXAA High, AMD 7970 At the 2560 x 1440 resolution the difference between CPU’s in terms of performance was almost minimal. As you can see the difference between CPU’s is with in a margin of error. This is not that surprising since the game doesn’t have alot of AI that is wandering around the map (like the Assassin Creed series for example) which requires a great deal of CPU power. But as we have already said any modern quad core CPU will do the job just fine. However, if the CPUs are giving more or less the same performance that is certainly not the case with the GPU’s. The GTX 770 performs better at around 15% in average than the AMD 7970 GHz Edition. When you look at the bright side, trailing by 15% isn’t that big of a deal when you compare it to 300%. 1920 x 1080, FXAA High, 1920 x 1080, FXAA High, GTX 770 1920 x 1080, FXAA High, AMD 7970 With the 1920 x 1080p resolution things started to get interesting since lowering the resolution brought more frames per second, more frames per second means bigger workload for your CPU in terms of processing those frames. Add to that equation and the weird game optimization where GPU load (in the 7970’s case) is being transferred to the CPU and you can get a pretty good idea in terms of what performance issues you will face. With the GTX 770 minor differences can be seen but nothing too conclusive, since all of these are with in a margin of error. However if you turn you attention to the AMD 7970 GHz Edition benchmark you will see a sudden difference in performance. Intel’s CPU are performing around 15% better than AMD’s but again AMD users won’t have any complaints considering how much less a FX CPU’s cost than an Intel. As with the 2560 x 1440 resolution the GTX 770 prevails over the 7970 GHz Edition again. In some cases, such as with the FX 6300 that difference goes up to 30%, which is not something to be taken lightly. Someone will need to release the fix for this as soon as possible, but the only question is: Who? System Memory and Video Memory usage System memory usage (FXAA High) Video Memory usage (FXAA High) As you can see from the graphs 3GB of system memory (RAM) is more than enough to play Batman: Arkham Origins .Warner Bros was right when recommending specs for the PC platform. When it comes to Video memory usage 1 GB of Vram ought to be enough, but just to be sure if you are wanting to buy a new GPU you should go for a 2GB version ,not only for this game but to be future proof as well since the games will become much more demanding when the next generation of consoles get released. We should note that GPU usage while testing at MSAA x8 at 2560 x a 1440 was around 1900 MB. Performance Improvement with Catalyst 13.11 Beta v6 Amd Drivers As you already know AMD has released their new 13.11 v6 drivers (just a few hours after we finished benchmarking) that improve performance in Batman Arkham Origins. Since there was no point in ignoring this we had to sit and redo the AMD GPU part all over again. AMD claims improvements of 35% with MSAA filters as you might remember how badly our 7970 performed in the earlier benchmark. 2560×1440 MSAAX8 PhysX OFF Old Drivers We didnt expect all that much, since 35% more of 16 fps really isn’t a big deal, but for the sake of objectivity (and because we are crazy) we decided to run the benchmark again. And we were in for a treat. 2560×1440 MSAAX8 PhysX OFF As you can see the results are staggering, AMD has not improved performance by 35% but by a whopping 350%, guess they made a typo. AMD’s 7970 leaves the GTX 770 behind leading by 10% overall in all resolutions. Since AMD was doing so well with the new drivers, and we were testing it with PhysX OFF we wanted to explore what the penalties would be in using PhysX (Normal) with AMD VS Nvidia on the FX 8350 and i7 4770k. 2560×1440 MSAAX8 PhysX Normal As you can see no penalties what so ever, a slight decrease not even worth mentioning . We must note that with the new drivers, CPU usage with the 7970 has decreased and was in the same range as the GTX 770. CPU usage on both is around 20-25%. 1920×1080 MSAAX8 PhysX OFF Again AMD’s 7970 does better than the GTX 770. The difference is around 10% but not so obvious as it was in the 2560 x 1440 resolution. Then we run tests with PhysX in Normal mode. 1920×1080 MSAAX8 PhysX Normal Now this is one of the strangest things we witnessed during benchmarking, all of the cards have a hit on performance with PhysX in Normal Mode. We tested 5 times with each set of combinations but the results were always the same. As you can see loss on fps with PhysX is around 20%. How did this not happen with the 2560 x 1440 resolution we have no idea. One of the things that crossed our mind was that PhysX doesn’t really work on both cards in 2560 x 1440.This is most probably due to PhysX for the AMD card running off the CPU. There is a possibility that the 1920 x 1080 resolution isn’t properly optimized yet, but this is all a speculation. Now we turned our attention to FXAA filters, AMD hasn’t said anything about improvements in this sector, however we decided to give it a go. 2560×1440 FXAA, 7970 New Driver 2560×1440 FXAA, 7970, Old driver 2560×1440 FXAA, GTX 770 If you compare with the initial benchmarks you will see that improvement are next to nothing and all within a margin of error. The GTX 770 performs better (10% average). We didn’t expect any miracles but we also tested in 1920 x 1080 at the same settings. 1920×1080 FXAA High. 7970 1920×1080 FXAA High, 7970 Old drivers 1920×1080 FXAA High, GTX 770 The results are actually a bit better and the gain is around 5-10% overall, however its still behind the GTX 770 but the margin has been decreased by 10-15 % overall. It is nice from AMD for fixing this promptly, but I believe that users would like an even faster reaction. AMD has always stated that a reason for them for being late on driver updates is because they don’t get the games in time from certain developers. Since this is a “The way its meant to be played” title we wouldn’t be surprised if that was true. What ever the truth is, AMD has done a good job with improving performance with MSAA filters and deserves credit for it. Of course we would like to see some improvement with FXAA filters as well, but no biggy if that doesn’t happen. In the future, AMD, please release your drivers before we do benchmarks. PLEASE! Conclusion Warner Bros has delivered a beautiful a game and if we weren’t having those optimizations issues (we are still not 100% sure who is to blame for this) and it is expected that there will be fixed in the near future. When it comes to performance the GTX770 has outdone AMD’s 7970 in this duel, prior to driver updates. Again by this it is obvious that Nvidia has been preparing for this game for awhile and honestly failure wasn’t an option in this case. When it comes to CPUs, Intel’s i7 and i5 are at the top but their strength comes out at the open with the 7970, compared to other CPU’s, but if you have any AMD CPU from our benchmark you shouldn’t feel disappointment because those CPU’s have justified their value and even more. AMD is still strong at that middle and low segment in terms of price/performance ratio and its good to see AMD keeping pace. See Pricing If you have any questions about the benchmark please ask in the comment section below and I will be glad to answer. FlameWater Go to steam forums and look at topics of people trying to figure out why 5 year old tech and intergrated graphics can’t max out LOL Matt That’s any and all forums concerning PC gaming… zpoccc annoying that the more technically powerful gpu actually performs worse. thankfully this type of thing wont last (at least in nvidia’s favor) once the next gen is in full swing and all games are coded to be AMD optimized by default. Matt Negative. More DX11 optimized games are coming and not just AMD optimized outside of games supporting Mantle… Hardware agnostic coding will still remain at the top for the majority of the PC market. There are still DX11 optimizations that haven’t been utilized yet. zpoccc the bottom line is, developers who are releasing next gen console versions of games are going to be spending a lot of time optimizing for the AMD gpus in those consoles. it seems obvious that that effort will translate to better optimization for AMD gpu equipped PCs. Matt But it doesn’t work that way… Not even mantle allows for complete universal coding between console and PC so optimization is a still dependent on the devs. zpoccc never said anything about “complete universal coding between console and PC”, just that AMD will benefit from optimization done on the console end of things. herpderpherp Nice benchmark. I was wondering whether you had PhysX enabled as well? How much of a performance drop is observed when enabling physX? It would have been nice to know this as well. However if the GTX770 wins against the 7970, with physX enabled on the 770, then its truly awkward. Matt It’s just a rebranded 680 with minor overclocks and a beefed up reference cooler… I see a bigger point with the 8350 keeping up with the I7 4770k. c4toast later 290x beat titan by 350% xD Usman Khan it’s not 350% over competition, read article again, it’s 350% over there own performance before new drivers. it was 13-20 fps before new drivers, now its 40-50. BDK Runs great on my R9 270X maxed out @ 1080p with constant 60fps with vsync on. Gameworks titles are locked down by nvidia so it will take slightly longer for AMD to catch up on those. Nikolas Nikolaou Its a very pretty looking game and is well optimised after driver updates. Your R9-270x seems to be rocking it pretty well. Realkman666 What’s the CPU? BDK FX-8320 stock. Realkman666 Damn, almost bought it recently. I stutter a bit on the ol’ Athlon.