It was way back in mid June that Batman: Arkham Knight launched, and now, in September, it's nearing an acceptable state on PC. I strongly emphasise the word acceptable. Not good, not great; acceptable. Batman: Arkham Knight still isn't a well optimised port, but with the interim Patch 2, it is at least taking another shaky step towards being ready for sale once more.
If you were one of the thousands upon thousands given a free code by Nvidia with a graphics card purchase, or you managed to buy it early enough that hadn't been withdrawn from sale, then you're no doubt interested in just what this patch brings to Arkham Knight. Here we'll be taking a look at the changes, as well as seeing just how the MSI GTX 950 Gaming 2G handles it with our before and after benchmark comparisons.
Contrary to the previous rumours that the GeForce GTX 990M mobile graphics would be based on the ridiculously high-end GM200 GPU used in the GTX 980 Ti and Titan X, it turns out Nvidia’s upcoming chip will instead be based on the Maxwell GM204 GPU. It turns out, a little unsurprisingly, that the GM200 runs too hot for user in laptops, forcing the use of the GM204 GPU.
The GM204 is still no slouch however. It’s the same GPU used in the desktop variant of the GeForce GTX 980, so it’s packing some serious punch. The GTX 990M is a full fat mobile variant packing the entire complete of 2048 stream processors, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 8GB GDDR5 memory, all on a 256-memory interface. The GTX 990M GPU itself is clocked at 1190MHz.
Believe it or not, Mad Max’s apocalyptic wasteland is actually kind of stunning in its own peculiar way. It’s not often I’d reserve praise for skyboxes, but Avalanche has pulled something a little special out the bag here for the stunning vistas on offer in Mad Max. Who knew 50 shades of brown could look fantastic. Obviously just how good Mad Max is going to look is going to depend on your gaming rig, but here we’ve got a look at just how good Mad Max looks at both minimum and max graphics.
We’ve already been over how the mighty 980 Ti tears through Mad Max, but here we’re taking a look at what happens when you throw the MSI GeForce GTX 950 2G at it. Here we’ll be looking at the visual difference between min and max, as well as a peek at how MSI’s $175 GTX 950 handles it.
When you think of Snake and Metal Gear Solid, you’re mind probably drifts pretty quickly to the iconic ￼triangle, square circle and cross of PlayStation. Despite appearances on plenty of other platforms, Metal Gear Solid has been an icon for Sony’s line of consoles. It’s one of the highest rated series of all time, and finally we’ve been given a PC version day and date with the console release in the shape of MGS V. 12 year old me wouldn’t believe my eyes.
With that in mind, we were interested to see how Kojima Productions and Konami had handled the PC version. Whether there would be a preference for the console versions or a hastily thrown together port. The good news is, neither of these scenarios are true. As you can see from our benchmarks on the 750 Ti earlier today, Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is a real performer, and that applies to all except the previous-gen platforms. Now it’s time to see how the MSI variant of Nvidia’s latest budget card, the GTX 950, stacks up against the horsepower of Sony’s console. It’s time for Metal Gear Solid 5 PS4 Vs PC.
So Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is out, and everyone on your Steam friends list is busy playing it. The only problem is, what if it doesn't run on your rig that isn't full of brand new, top‐tier components? You know, a normal gaming rig that doesn't come loaded with a $1000 graphics card encrusted with priceless jewels.
Here we'll be taking a look at just how MGS 5 runs on older hardware; whether the next generation of stealth is compatible with the last generation of PC gaming goodness. For these Metal Gear Solid V benchmarks we'll be seeing how the $110 GeForce GTX 750 Ti holds up to playing Konami's latest at Ultra graphics settings, from 720p resolution to the current industry standard of 1920 x 1080p.
Avalanche Studios has a great track record when it comes to PC gaming, but alarm bells were inevitably set off when it was announced Warner Bros would be publishing its Mad Max game. Following disastrous PC launches for Batman: Arkham Knight and Mortal Kombat X there was rising unrest, and attention turned to Mad Max, which launched today.
Here we’ll be taking a look at just how the PC version has been handled, as well as the first gameplay footage and preliminary benchmark tests from the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. We'll be comparing how Mad Max looks at both minimum and ultra graphics, so you know whether that extra hardware power is a necessity. It’s time to see whether Mad Max is Avalanche’s Magnum Opus, or doomed to roam the wasteland for eternity.
Kept you waiting, huh? After years out in the wilderness, Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain has finally arrived. In fact for PC gamers, it's arrived two weeks earlier than we'd anticipated. It's Hideo Kojima's final flourish with the long-running, bona fide crazy stealth-action series and on first impressions it looks like he's going out with a bang.
Before we get down to the nitty gritty of benchmarking MGS 5, here we're taking a look at all of the graphics options and system settings included in the PC version of Metal Gear Solid 5. Thankfully we haven't been lumped with a Dark Souls-esque slapdash PC port, and it seems as if plenty of care and attention has gone into ensuring the PC version of Metal Gear Solid 5 is the best one out there.
Both AMD and Nvidia have been busy pushing out new drivers in preparation for Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain and Mad Max. The tempting pair of big-hitters both launch today on PC, and if you’re after tip-top performance from your rig then you’re going to want to grab your respective drivers.
Nvidia was first out the gate with its GeForce 355.82 graphics card drivers, which come with game-ready optimisations for both Mad Max and MGS V. The latter in particular has seen Konami hop into bed with Nvidia ahead of launch, offering Nvidia GameWorks features and free copies of the game with selected graphics cards.
The hot balmy British summer is nearly behind us. As the weather turns from summer rain into winter rain we are pushed deeper into our gaming dens. And as if the Game Publishers recruit psychics to work out the exact dates we can no longer venture outside, the year's big games start to form an orderly release queue.
One of the most anticipated of these big hitter titles is this years Need For Speed open world racing game. Confidently due slap bang in the middle of the 2015 prime time release period, 3/5 November 2015. Here I am going to take a look at some of the info we already know about Need for Speed 2015, including a speculative insight at the expected NFS system requirements. Hopefully to give you some idea as to what sort of performance your PC will get when NFS comes to the PC in a couple of months.
When Oxide’s Ashes of the Singularity DirectX 12 benchmark tool was released earlier this month, it was surprising to see AMD’s range of graphics cards take a huge jump in performance compared to DX11, while Nvidia’s did not. In fact, AMD’s Radeon R9 290X was trading blows with Nvidia’s significantly more expensive GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
Now Oxide Games has spoken out about the benchmark results, claiming Nvidia GPUs don’t support DirectX 12 Asynchronous Compute/Shaders, while AMD’s do. For years now, AMD has been focusing on Asynchronous Shaders and Parallel Computing since the advent of GCN (Graphics Core Next) and the HD 7000 series. It’s the same tech used in the current-gen consoles that allow them to benefit from low overheads to power more impressive graphics than you’d normally expect. As such, AMD’s DirectX 12 performance is currently leaps ahead of Nvidia, who has been focused on DirectX 11 performance and Serial Compute.