what was your benchmark compatibility score?

My Score,
Dx9:
http://i1165.photobucket.com/albums/...pszhul6a2o.png

Dx11:
http://i1165.photobucket.com/albums/...psvdvqonvo.png

Anyone able to tell me if this is accurate with my setup or should it be higher/lower? Not that much of a tech expert but after seeing this maybe i should've gone with a higher up graphics card lol. I dont really play at max settings though so being able to play like that is good enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Craiger

I haven't done the benchmark, because I'm getting a "new" PC in a couple of days... but I'm getting a little worried right now.

I'm buying my bro's old PC (i5 3570k(4,2 GHz), Radeon 7950(1100/1400)), and while I know it's not the best PC out there, I've seen worse cards here getting pretty good scores... But all those have been Nvidia.

Is FFXIV really that much better on Nvidia cards? or is it just the benchmark? Cause it seems like they get like 50% more performance or something...

If it was a Nvidia card equivalent of a the 7950, I would probably get good enough score to run the game at high settings smoothly, but now I'm not so sure. :(

---

It's fine, it's just under a nVidia Geforce GTX 760 in capability.

As for if nVidia or AMD are better, there's no real answer. The nVidia Gameworks is just a middleware layer interfaced with DirectX11. If you play other games that have alternate DX9 and DX11 versions you often find that the DX11 version performs worse under certain conditions, but better under others, and that happens regardless of the video card. Archeage (CryEngine) has some fantastically awful glitches in their DX11 version where the textures just stop appearing. There's other kinds of middleware and game engines, and when you get down to it, middleware has to support doing everything within the capability of the video card otherwise it has to use CPU-powered reference implementations, and that will reflect badly on the middlware if it performs poorly on otherwise equivalently powered hardware.

For example earlier I posted a benchmark using the iGPU on the i7-4770 (HD Graphics 4600), and aside from the constant chatter of the hard drive (literately sounded like it was defragmenting) at maximum settings, visually it looked the same as the nVidia card. Performance wise, it was slightly above stop-motion animation, and wouldn't be playable in that state. Someone who was forced to use the iGPU to play the game would need to take all the settings down and run it at 1280x720. It'll look ugly but it won't be a suffering experience.

And I'm speaking from experience, I've gone through 4 video cards since Version 1.0 and FFXIV has constantly amazed me at what it looks like and stability, and constantly disappointed me in how it fails to take advantage of 64-bit memory space (imagine no loading time at all) and better timing netcode around AOE's. But compared to other MMO games I've played, FFXIV is the least broken of them all. It doesn't choke when spammed, when too many players/monsters/npc's are in the area, and other than being a bit brittle with netcode (simply uploading a video to youtube is enough to drop FFXIV's net connection) it's not a painful experience.

6 Months old Gaming laptop. Setting adjusted to what will be used in-game.

http://i.imgur.com/jaUE5rL.jpg

Not too shabby :)

Got 12643 on Maximum Settings at 1080p with DX 11

Running i7-3770k with GTX 680 SLI, not bad for a 3 year old system.

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...psjgqwo0k6.png

http://i59.tinypic.com/29l1edj.jpg
:( Maybe if I upgrade my graphics it'll be better. JK. I was surprised this laptop actually made it through the test.

DX11 @4k

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/...psxbsdm0fh.png

I am having issues with benchmark where it seems to be picking up the iGPU from the i7 4790K after I upgraded it from the i7 965. Using the same GFX 680, it has it showing under Main Display. When I launch the benchmark it's really sluggish and it feels as it's using the iGPU instead of the 680. I had way better scores with my i7 965, and now I can't even break 1k.

Score: 13765
Average Frame Rate: 106.554
Performance: Extremely High
Screen Size: 1920x1080
Screen Mode: Borderless Windowed
DirectX Version: 11

On Maximum Settings with
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770K CPU @ 4.3 GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 x2

I get about 14500 in Fullscreen mode

The benchmark really favors Nvidia. Comparing scores from a 780Ti and a 290x that should be almost equivalent or within a 10% range, the 780Ti utterly destroys the 290x. I've finally managed to get my 290x to also break 10,000 score with a 1250MHz core clock and +80mv. This is with a I7 3930k 6core @4.5GHz
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k7...k.jpg~original

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hours

This is what I mean when I say "lag"...

http://i.imgur.com/MGfveXp.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/oaAMT4w.jpg

---

I dunno why, but I got the heebie jeebies from that low ass score.
LOL! Look at everyone looking at you in shame. xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

hmm, for giggles I'm going to run it on the iGPU...

http://puu.sh/htElP/57789bcaa6.jpg

and for completeness, here's the "standard desktop" dx11 on the iGPU
http://puu.sh/htENn/364fd4fc2e.jpg

No sane person would actually play any game on the iGPU, but this is the trash that "bargain" laptops and desktops come with.

---

I disagree with iGPU being absolutely worthless this is my tablet using realistic settings that I WILL be using to play from work :)

http://i.imgur.com/MuAxBGJ.png

the game actually runs decently on the surface pro 3 for dungeons crafting gathering fates and guildhests :)

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Tested on: 4/28/2015 6:01:20 PM
Score: 12742
Average Frame Rate: 100.766
Performance: Extremely High
-Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 1.607 sec
Scene #2 6.448 sec
Scene #3 5.032 sec
Scene #4 4.591 sec
Scene #5 4.302 sec
Scene #6 1.882 sec
Total Loading Time 23.863 sec


System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.150316-1654)
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
8109.180MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (VRAM 1989 MB) 9.18.0013.4788

http://i.imgur.com/0duSx3d.jpg
Direct X11 loading screen times it said 51 seconds.
Direct X9 loading screen times it said 41 seconds.

As for my resolution 1280x720, don't know why it said laptop when it's a desktop. Because i'm windowed full screen mode?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zigkid3

http://imgur.com/0duSx3d
Direct X11 loading screen times it said 51 seconds.
Direct X9 loading screen times it said 41 seconds.

As for my resolution 1280x720, don't know why it said laptop when it's a desktop. Because i'm windowed full screen mode?

edit: image tags never seem to work for me :/

---

I had issues with the settings reverting to default values sometimes but laptop is a graphic setting you can change in the tabs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yurimi

I had issues with the settings reverting to default values sometimes but laptop is a graphic setting you can change in the tabs

---

Yeah found the setting to change. don't know why it changed to that. So here's a new benchmark with correct resolution:
http://i.imgur.com/aDcyIAa.png
49 seconds for loading screen times.
I think i could've scored higher, my computer was running really hot after doing 3 benchmarks in a row.

I got 9691 Extremely High at:
Maximum Dx11 setting
2560x1080
i7 cpu 920 2.67GHz
Nvidia Geforce 980 (4GB)

Please be sure you're posting:

CPU
GPU
Resolution
DX11 or DX9
Graphics Preset

I'm seeing some scores with some lower-end cards that I know aren't max'ing out (or posting) their settings. (Doesn't make sense to post a 25k score on Radeon 3000 running at 640x480.)

http://i.imgur.com/KucYWlX.png

http://cagworks.net/score.jpg

Computer #1: Macbook Pro Retina (Late 2013), Windows 8.1 through Boot Camp

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Score: 3648 High
1920x1200 Standard (Laptop) DirectX11 Borderless Windowed
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4850HQ CPU @ 2.30GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

Computer #2: Media PC, running AMD A10-7850K APU (TDP Limited to 75W for heat reasons in small case)

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Score: 2816 Fairly High
1920x1080 Standard (Laptop) DirectX11 Full Screen
AMD A10-7850K Radeon R7, 12 Compute Cores 4C+8G
AMD Radeon(TM) R7 Graphics

Computer #2: Media PC, running AMD A10-7850K APU (TDP Set to Auto (95W) which gave a negligible gain of 36 points... xD)

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Score: 2852 Fairly High
1920x1080 Standard (Laptop) DirectX11 Full Screen
AMD A10-7850K Radeon R7, 12 Compute Cores 4C+8G
AMD Radeon(TM) R7 Graphics


Computer #3: The Gaming PC (CPU is overclocked to 4.2GHz)

FINAL FANTASY XIV: Heavensward Benchmark
Score: 6232 Very High
1920x1080 Maximum DirectX11 Borderless Windowed
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570K CPU @ 3.40GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760

All done at 1080P full screen

DirectX 11

Maximum Preset 8316

High Preset 9606

Maximum (Direct x 9) 11172

DirectX 9

Maximum Preset 10904

High Preset 11468

An Update:

http://i.imgur.com/YQlQt7C.png

http://i.imgur.com/U5wr0AE.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yurimi

I had issues with the settings reverting to default values sometimes but laptop is a graphic setting you can change in the tabs

---

The settings are saved independently of DX9 and DX11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yurimi

I disagree with iGPU being absolutely worthless this is my tablet using realistic settings that I WILL be using to play from work :)

http://i.imgur.com/MuAxBGJ.png

the game actually runs decently on the surface pro 3 for dungeons crafting gathering fates and guildhests :)

---

That's barely playable, and that's not running at the native resolution either.

Like I can fudge that by running the iGPU in a window too.
http://puu.sh/huOhw/096799207f.jpg

That said, there will be thermal throttling on laptops, especially "tablet" and "ultrabook" devices that I wouldn't recommend trying to play the game on them.

Everyone else...

The benchmark results are meaningless unless you run at the native resolution of your monitor, at full screen. Windowed modes may not make use of SLI/Crossfire/additional GPU's.

First Try:
1280x720 Windowed (Laptop?)
Settings were capped for Direct X9 but ran it under X11
Score:5782 Very High
Load time 67.734

Second try
1920x1080 full screen
Direct X11 at max settings (only the ones with that picture icon)
Score:4148 High
Load Time: 65.138 (??)

Third try
1920x1080 full screen
Direct X 11 reflections- high, grass- normal, Ambient Occulision HBAO+standard Dx11 (these three set one down from their max)
Score: 5118 very High
Load Time 62.55

Did another test with the same settings and got a score of 5134 with a load time of 73.515. Might be background stuff, but either way at least I know I can run it well under 2.0 settings if I used it on pc. However I have no idea if its trying to use my CPU for everything or if graphics are being feed through the card. If people with less can run it higher with out the need to over clock. Then odds are I'm still good on hardware for the next couple years.

System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit Service Pack 1
AMD FX(tm)-6300 Six-Core Processor
8174.117MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (VRAM 1995 MB) 9.18.0013.5012

can i have some of your computers or laptops >...>

Tried on my 5 year old laptop (core i5 450m, geforce 310m, 4gb RAM), which can barely run the game (mainly play on PS3/4 at current). Downloaded the client just for the Au Ra creation, figured why not benchmark this old thing.

Lowest settings on everything, turned off everything I could. Ran at native resolution full screen (1366x768)... Got 1786 "Slightly Low", load time was about 150 or so. It wasn't slightly low just watching it, the high points were maybe 20FPS maximum. That was when nothing was going on on screen, the rest was pretty bad lol. No idea how the score got that high.

In a few days I'll have a new desktop though! So excited! i5 4690K and Geforce 970 GTX should be able to handle the game :P

4841 Max 1920x1080 DX11. I know it isn't extremely high but it is still High so I am happy.

GTX boards and better cpu speed will surely turns things good ;)

As a rule of thumb, as I tried with various settings:
- if you get 5500 or above, you can happily play the game (fps at least 30 for 99% of time and if drops under, it is only for less a second)
- when you get 7000 or above, it is time to higher some setting for your graphic pleasure. (keep fps at least 30 for 100% of time)
- When you are on 11k or above, you are ready for serious eSport and PvP (fps NEVER dropping under 60)

Switched from Max to High(Desktop) and got 5497 which is only 600 points higher than what I got on Max so I will be sticking to max settings. I use Max settings now so it wouldn't be much of a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalaRu

GTX boards and better cpu speed will surely turns things good ;)

As a rule of thumb, as I tried with various settings:
- if you get 5500 or above, you can happily play the game (fps at least 30 for 99% of time and if drops under, it is only for less a second)
- when you get 7000 or above, it is time to higher some setting for your graphic pleasure. (keep fps at least 30 for 100% of time)
- When you are on 11k or above, you are ready for serious eSport and PvP (fps NEVER dropping under 60)

---

30FPS sucks on a larger screen with at least 1440p reso tho. It doesn't look smooth at all :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fantasy9

Switched from Max to High(Desktop) and got 5497 which is only 600 points higher than what I got on Max so I will be sticking to max settings. I use Max settings now so it wouldn't be much of a difference.

---

Yep, difference is minimal. Then if the fps dropped in places it were more than enough (i.e. 40 instead of 50 in some parts), it is more than safe keep all the goodies on :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ooshima

30FPS sucks on a larger screen with at least 1440p reso tho. It doesn't look smooth at all :/

---

30 is to play the game.
If you are on 1440p it means you are looking for all bells and whistles and surely you are on another league of PC. You most likely demanding for 60 fps.
Edit: not to mention, game is done at 1080p: when you go 1440p you just see an upscaled version of 1080p images. unless the PC expansion have dedicated 1440p graphics but is unlikely.

http://i.imgur.com/KUmvtQk.png

Lower than expected. Hmm...

Heya guys,

small warning for people that use laptops that have OPTIMUS. You might have to create Nvidia Profiles for all the benchmarks executables and set the default card to Nvidia, or it will use the INTEL card (obviously with bad results).

Cheers!

This was my 3rd time...

http://i.imgur.com/S1mNjNK.jpg?1

1st - 1996 (Fairly Low)
2nd - 2290 (Standard)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -DMR-

This was my 3rd time...

http://i.imgur.com/S1mNjNK.jpg?1

1st - 1996 (Fairly Low)
2nd - 2290 (Standard)

---

UPDATE - 3087 (Fairly High)

*1280x720 Custom Full Screen*

1080p
http://i.imgur.com/lfpU1Yl.png

1440p
http://i.imgur.com/qe13a3e.png

3277. Max Settings, DX11.

After seeing it run on my SO's rig equipped with a brand new gpu, I realize what I've been missing out on. Time to invest in a new graphics card!

Benched this quite a few ways:
(GTX Titan DX9 / DX11 Maximum and Standard High)
(GTX Titan X DX9 / DX 11 Maximum and Standard High)

http://dfullerton.smugmug.com/photos...-fVTCsc8-M.jpg

http://dfullerton.smugmug.com/photos...-rgjnPjh-M.jpg

http://dfullerton.smugmug.com/photos...-Rt2jWMs-M.jpg

after several hours with a board out of storage and a old i5 i pulled off the perfect score
http://i.imgur.com/2aDMglZ.png

just sucks that that i5 requires 1.4 volt + now to keep its over clock its dying a slow death every time i bring it out.
4.87Ghz on the I5 and 1176 on That 780 its normaly in triple sli in my X68 system

:( still can't find any Nvidia 960m or 970m result.
the closest is 850m

I benched this out twice for DX9 and DX11 (since my first DX11 score wasn't satisfactory to me I went out and bought a new card).

First set from the following setup, 1900x1200 at max settings:
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.150316-1654)
AMD FX(tm)-8350 Eight-Core Processor
16284.316MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (VRAM 1990 MB) 9.18.0013.5012

DX9-
Score: 7379
Average Frame Rate: 60.680
Performance: Extremely High
-Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 6.087 sec
Scene #2 16.594 sec
Scene #3 7.389 sec
Scene #4 7.386 sec
Scene #5 8.413 sec
Scene #6 5.343 sec
Total Loading Time 51.217 sec

DX11:
Score: 5577
Average Frame Rate: 43.675
Performance: Very High
-Easily capable of running the game. Should perform exceptionally well, even at higher resolutions.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 2.908 sec
Scene #2 12.164 sec
Scene #3 6.570 sec
Scene #4 6.087 sec
Scene #5 5.118 sec
Scene #6 3.016 sec
Total Loading Time 35.865 sec

Second setup with new card, same graphics settings:
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.150316-1654)
AMD FX(tm)-8350 Eight-Core Processor
16284.316MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (VRAM 3072 MB) 9.18.0013.5012

DX9:
Score: 10225
Average Frame Rate: 89.212
Performance: Extremely High
-Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 3.806 sec
Scene #2 11.751 sec
Scene #3 5.927 sec
Scene #4 5.374 sec
Scene #5 4.811 sec
Scene #6 3.576 sec
Total Loading Time 35.247 sec

DX11:
Score: 9830
Average Frame Rate: 77.384
Performance: Extremely High
-Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.
Loading Times by Scene
Scene #1 2.759 sec
Scene #2 12.015 sec
Scene #3 6.355 sec
Scene #4 5.882 sec
Scene #5 5.123 sec
Scene #6 2.845 sec
Total Loading Time 34.981 sec

-Note-
The only changes between the first and second sets are the Graphics card.