Cyberpunk 2077 PC GPU Benchmarks: Best Video Cards for 1080p, 1440p, & 4K
video description
Date: 2020-12-11
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Dean
Excellent video, great quality as always and very informative.
This is absolutely not a criticism, just a thought on a very small part of the video. At around 1300 minutes, there is a comparison of average FPS on a series of graphics cards and standard deviation (SD) is shown - which provides good evidence that the data presented are consistent.
While SD is absolutely fine to use (hence not a criticism), I personally find Coefficient of Variation (CV) a more layman friendly statistic to use for this type of thing. CV is your SD as a percentage of you average.
I'm not sure how stats-y you folks are, so here's a little explanation of why I like it (might help someone else in the comments).
1) Most people understand what a percentage is more than what an SD is.
2) When you have averages that are very different sizes, it's easier to compare consistency using CV. For example.
If you have an average of 1000fps and SD of 100 Vs and average of 500fps and SD of 60, some people might interpret the larger SD on the 1000fps to mean it is worse. When in reality 100 is 10% of 100p and 60 is 12% of 500. Showing that the first values are more consistent.
I don't think you guys use SD that often, it's not very common in the gaming sphere. So it is probably more effort than its worth for a tiny section of a video. Just a thought.
If you've seen this - thanks for reading, and more importantly, thank you for all of you amazing content, journalistic integrity, and excellent good quality data.
reply
Excellent video, great quality as always and very informative.
This is absolutely not a criticism, just a thought on a very small part of the video. At around 1300 minutes, there is a comparison of average FPS on a series of graphics cards and standard deviation (SD) is shown - which provides good evidence that the data presented are consistent.
While SD is absolutely fine to use (hence not a criticism), I personally find Coefficient of Variation (CV) a more layman friendly statistic to use for this type of thing. CV is your SD as a percentage of you average.
I'm not sure how stats-y you folks are, so here's a little explanation of why I like it (might help someone else in the comments).
1) Most people understand what a percentage is more than what an SD is.
2) When you have averages that are very different sizes, it's easier to compare consistency using CV. For example.
If you have an average of 1000fps and SD of 100 Vs and average of 500fps and SD of 60, some people might interpret the larger SD on the 1000fps to mean it is worse. When in reality 100 is 10% of 100p and 60 is 12% of 500. Showing that the first values are more consistent.
I don't think you guys use SD that often, it's not very common in the gaming sphere. So it is probably more effort than its worth for a tiny section of a video. Just a thought.
If you've seen this - thanks for reading, and more importantly, thank you for all of you amazing content, journalistic integrity, and excellent good quality data.
reply
Christian
Thanks for the interesting video.
I started running at ultra/high with RT on (reflections ultra), dlss auto, and got around 70-80 fps at the start of the game. Once in the city I ended up at 45-70 ish depending on the location.
I'm now running ultra/high (some shadows adjusted down), without RT and dlss auto (or was it quality?), and getting 60-80 fps depending on the location. Not too bad. Some occasional inconsistencies.
I'm getting a bit of CPU bottlenecking though, which I guess is to be expected with an old cpu (i7-7700k 4800MHz). I want to hold off one more generation though.
DLSS 2.0 is very useful, and gives a nice boost in fps. I did notice some flickering on distant buildings with DLSS settings other than Quality though. Can't say I've noticed it in the city, only at the first nomad starter area.
reply
Thanks for the interesting video.
I started running at ultra/high with RT on (reflections ultra), dlss auto, and got around 70-80 fps at the start of the game. Once in the city I ended up at 45-70 ish depending on the location.
I'm now running ultra/high (some shadows adjusted down), without RT and dlss auto (or was it quality?), and getting 60-80 fps depending on the location. Not too bad. Some occasional inconsistencies.
I'm getting a bit of CPU bottlenecking though, which I guess is to be expected with an old cpu (i7-7700k 4800MHz). I want to hold off one more generation though.
DLSS 2.0 is very useful, and gives a nice boost in fps. I did notice some flickering on distant buildings with DLSS settings other than Quality though. Can't say I've noticed it in the city, only at the first nomad starter area.
reply
Tiki832
Your case samples seem pretty reflective of my overall experience playing the game as a whole. Using a 3700x with a asus strix 1080, playing at 1440 ultra (but with motion blur and DoF disabled as any sane person would). Getting pretty consistent FPS range of 38-43, with the rare drop to mid 30s.
Interestingly the game seems more influenced by age of CPU and use of a SSD then is often the case.
Really can't wait for 6800xts being in stock here in the UK, as my trusty 1080 has served well but needs a rest now.
reply
Your case samples seem pretty reflective of my overall experience playing the game as a whole. Using a 3700x with a asus strix 1080, playing at 1440 ultra (but with motion blur and DoF disabled as any sane person would). Getting pretty consistent FPS range of 38-43, with the rare drop to mid 30s.
Interestingly the game seems more influenced by age of CPU and use of a SSD then is often the case.
Really can't wait for 6800xts being in stock here in the UK, as my trusty 1080 has served well but needs a rest now.
reply
LuxLikeGaming
Just as an information for people with similar builds:
I'm playing on a 1060 6GB ( 2050MHz Core, 4500MHz Mem) and an i7-3770k 4.2GHz at 1080p 95% scaling and medium preset and I locked my FPS to 45 because most of the time I cant quite reach 50 so solid 45 feels smoother to me (on a 144Hz, Freesync display with low framerate compensation, but I dont know if this is helping the feel in any meaningfull way here).
So the game is playable, even if an upgrade would be nice to push higher framerates
reply
Just as an information for people with similar builds:
I'm playing on a 1060 6GB ( 2050MHz Core, 4500MHz Mem) and an i7-3770k 4.2GHz at 1080p 95% scaling and medium preset and I locked my FPS to 45 because most of the time I cant quite reach 50 so solid 45 feels smoother to me (on a 144Hz, Freesync display with low framerate compensation, but I dont know if this is helping the feel in any meaningfull way here).
So the game is playable, even if an upgrade would be nice to push higher framerates
reply
TheXlen
This video is pretty useless to about 70% people watching due to the fact that you don't actually show performance metrics that are relevant to them, like even including a GTX 1060 would change that number by 20-30% due to the fact that 15% of the market are using just them not to mention alternatives, although 580 is relatively close to it in performance it's known to scale differently from pascal, so again video made for 5% of the audience rather than majority
reply
This video is pretty useless to about 70% people watching due to the fact that you don't actually show performance metrics that are relevant to them, like even including a GTX 1060 would change that number by 20-30% due to the fact that 15% of the market are using just them not to mention alternatives, although 580 is relatively close to it in performance it's known to scale differently from pascal, so again video made for 5% of the audience rather than majority
reply
Gamers
Big shout-out to Patrick on the team at GN for managing to pull this off while I was out recovering from surgery. Show some love in the comments for Patrick's effort to get this done quickly! Hobbled back in to knock this one out. We have a lot more we want to do with this game, but for now, this should get us all started! There's a ton more to do yet, but we may wait for a few more patches to roll-out before we embark on testing yet more cards.
reply
Big shout-out to Patrick on the team at GN for managing to pull this off while I was out recovering from surgery. Show some love in the comments for Patrick's effort to get this done quickly! Hobbled back in to knock this one out. We have a lot more we want to do with this game, but for now, this should get us all started! There's a ton more to do yet, but we may wait for a few more patches to roll-out before we embark on testing yet more cards.
reply
doogen56
If anyone is curious how the ultra low spec runs, I have a 4770k oced to 4.6, evga 780ti, on win 7 with latest drivers, I can pull down a maximum of 33fps average of around 24 or so 1080p medium textures with pretty much everything turned off, and after great massaging. it hammers this hardware and really brings the temps up. It doesn't look or play amazing but it's just enough to be fun. only a few slideshows so far.
reply
If anyone is curious how the ultra low spec runs, I have a 4770k oced to 4.6, evga 780ti, on win 7 with latest drivers, I can pull down a maximum of 33fps average of around 24 or so 1080p medium textures with pretty much everything turned off, and after great massaging. it hammers this hardware and really brings the temps up. It doesn't look or play amazing but it's just enough to be fun. only a few slideshows so far.
reply
MrVipitis
970 stock and 6600k 4.5. getting 18-30 at 1440p all low. At quarter res 1280x720 all low I get 60-70 in some areas and below 40 elsewhere. But the upscaling filter is horrible. Maybe Nvidia or my monitor has settings to improve that.
Got told to play this on GeForce Now instead. But waiting lines seem to be an issue there.
Won't upgrade my computer this generation.
reply
970 stock and 6600k 4.5. getting 18-30 at 1440p all low. At quarter res 1280x720 all low I get 60-70 in some areas and below 40 elsewhere. But the upscaling filter is horrible. Maybe Nvidia or my monitor has settings to improve that.
Got told to play this on GeForce Now instead. But waiting lines seem to be an issue there.
Won't upgrade my computer this generation.
reply
MigotRen
on my 3080 i use the Overall highest settings and turn shadow resolution to Medium. dlss on qality while my native res is 3440x1440p. i mostly get 50-60fps. if i turn raytracing off i imediatly get near 100 which is my monitors refreshrate. so i mostly keep the rt on. but i could turn it off fast in case of a very demanding combat Scene in city Center for example
reply
on my 3080 i use the Overall highest settings and turn shadow resolution to Medium. dlss on qality while my native res is 3440x1440p. i mostly get 50-60fps. if i turn raytracing off i imediatly get near 100 which is my monitors refreshrate. so i mostly keep the rt on. but i could turn it off fast in case of a very demanding combat Scene in city Center for example
reply
Logan
We can always hope that this is a game that will at least raise the baseline for GPU's overall in the future. It would be nice to think that older cards could become cheap on ebay, now that they can't handle games. We'll see. It would be nice if they could patch the game up more, those new GPU's that just came out are expensive it's disappointing.
reply
We can always hope that this is a game that will at least raise the baseline for GPU's overall in the future. It would be nice to think that older cards could become cheap on ebay, now that they can't handle games. We'll see. It would be nice if they could patch the game up more, those new GPU's that just came out are expensive it's disappointing.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
