Learning that Fallout 4 is a Nvidia GameWorks title was a little cringeworthy, but developer Bethesda has remained adamant that there is no funny business going on here and that the game is also well optimized for AMD hardware.

Therefore, we don’t expect the Fallout 4 launch to be anything like Assassin’s Creed Unity, Batman: Arkham Knight, Project CARS or The Witcher III: Wild Hunt (with HairWorks enabled). Fallout 4 should be more similar to GTA V, a game that is well optimized for a range of hardware thanks to collaborative efforts with Nvidia and AMD.

Bethesda has also stressed that Fallout 4 on PC won’t be held back by the console versions, i.e. there’s no frame rate cap and you can look forward to superior graphics.

Advertisement

Many eager PC gamers are undoubtedly waiting to see how the game looks and performs so we’ve put together our usual performance analysis to give you an idea of how Fallout 4 should play on your system...

Advertisement

Testing Methodology

Our test rig was outfitted with an Intel Core i7-6700K to remove CPU bottlenecks that could influence high-end GPU scores.

Advertisement

Using Fraps we recorded 120 seconds of gameplay starting at the gas station where you meet your new best friend “Dogmeat”. We then walk down the road to the town of “Concord” where we did a lap of the town and ran through a skirmish with a few raiders, which is where the frame rate often fell to its lowest value.

Fallout 4 was tested at three resolutions: 1920x1080, 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 using the ultra quality preset. This means TAA was the anti-aliasing method used and anisotropic filtering was set to x16. “Bokeh” depth of field was used and ambient occlusion was set to SSAO (high). Additional rendering features such as screen space reflections, wetness, rain occlusion, motion blur and lens flare were also enabled.

Advertisement

Test System Specs

Benchmarks: 1080p

Advertisement

At 1080p we find that Fallout 4 in all of its ultra-quality glory isn’t that dependent on the GPU. Mid-range cards of years ago are able to deliver playable performance, albeit just. For instance, HD 7870 spat out 43fps and never dipped below 34fps while the old GTX 660 Ti was even more impressive with an average of 49fps and a minimum of 38fps.

The modern budget graphics cards such as the GTX 950 provided very playable performance with an average of 51fps. The mid-range contenders such as the GTX 960 and R9 380 offered solid performance as well, though the GTX 960 was noticeably faster with an average of 63fps opposed to 55fps.

Advertisement

Benchmarks: 1440p

Advertisement

At 1440p we find that much of the field struggles to keep the minimum frame rate above 30fps and failing to do so results in very choppy performance. The HD 7970 GHz Edition and GTX 680 are borderline playable at this resolution. Ideally, 1440p calls for the GTX 780 or R9 290 — both delivered similar performance to that of the GTX 970 and R9 390.

Benchmarks: 2160p

Advertisement

Things get ugly at 4K — even the mighty GTX 980 Ti struggles to provide perfectly smooth gameplay. While some would argue that an average of 45fps and a minimum of 34fps is perfectly fine, we noticed plenty of input lag that made the game feel much worse than it does at say 60fps. As usual, we’d say 4K demands multi-GPU technology for acceptable performance.

Read More:

Advertisement

Republished with permission from:

Advertisement

Steven Walton is a writer at TechSpot. TechSpot is a computer technology publication serving PC enthusiasts, gamers and IT pros since 1998.