The benchmark results for Advanced Warfare indicate strong performance.
The benchmark results for Advanced Warfare indicate strong performance.
Guru3d has shared their testing outcomes. Over the past few years, several PC titles have suffered from stuttering and low frame rates, often without clear justification for such performance issues. Some enthusiasts who focus on benchmarks tend to overlook optimization problems and mistakenly praise games that run slowly as impressive. However, most in the PC community have rightly criticized these developers. We should also acknowledge when they release well-optimized titles. Achieving smooth visuals and fluid gameplay is a notable achievement after the struggles seen with COD:Ghosts. As anticipated, the 980 consistently leads in GPU performance, while strong results are observed across various resolutions. Results at 1080p, 2560x1440, and 4K (3840x2160) all perform well. Notably, the game appears to consume as much VRAM as necessary for storing textures, yet unlike previous tests it maintains stability even on 2GB GPUs. It’s not flawless—some fluctuations were noted, with frame rates varying between runs (e.g., 50, 46, or 56 FPS). This suggests the numbers provided are approximate. Another challenge was that certain levels consistently drop to around 40 FPS, while others briefly reach 60 FPS. Still, about eight out of ten sessions delivered solid performance, even on average hardware.
Here we see the feedback. The game performs well on the platform, but some users find it lacking in optimization. One player praises its speed despite being a basic engine, while another criticizes its poor optimization and claims the developer ignores PC compatibility.
They completely reworked nearly all aspects. The game features live reflections, particle effects, DX11 support, realistic lighting, sub-surface scattering, detailed tessellation, and advanced particle systems. Technically, it outperforms Battlefield 4 in many areas.
It could be worth checking. The updated team might genuinely be invested.
I really enjoyed MW and MW2 at first, plus I found TotalBisquit's multiplayer review quite impressive—it feels like a mix of old-school gaming with modern CoD elements. It’s pretty cool. Then I realized how much the regional pricing affects costs; I’m not paying the full retail price, which is a big deal. I definitely don’t want to spend that much on a game that won’t last long before it gets broken by hacks. So here’s the verdict: congrats Activision, but you were quickly dropped back down.
Ubisoft pauses its digging and begins paying attention to the community.