Don't summarize any results for us mortals!

Excellent gsdoighiuehodmsdnnbx at 1080p, somewhat ghdjgdguirzwoay at 4K, despite the lkhkdfjureesxcy and the lack of zeqweqoritjkyfxhx.



To summarize, it's pretty hjhqwoitpaéklyxcslortpowqqr.

Why ultra settings?

For me its more importent to have 250 min fps. So why not trying with low setting or even 720p and scaling to 1080p?

So that i know with gpu i have to by for this game.

I think the 6 core Ryzen + an upcoming Vega may be the best deal for QC if they introduce Vulkan support.

from what i see on the russian site the test with dx11. dx12 or vulkan can bring higher fps thats true.

from what i see the ryzens are good for apps but not for games. Vega we will see but normaly i like intel and nvidia much more than amd.

and nvidia will fix his vulkan performance maybe.

but thats all in the stars.. so right now it would be nice to see tests from ppl who realy what to max out the fps from the game.. and dont play with ultrasettings and stupid high price hardware.

Agreed, the only thing I learned from the benchmark is that if I pair my budget 120€ 1050ti with a 1300€ I7, I will get 65 fps on ultra settings.

4 cores and high ghz is key.. so u only need something like i5 7600k (250€) or i7 7700k (360€) so u can overclock to 4,5-5ghz if u want.

a gtx 1070 u get for ~450 € and i think u will be fine.

but i dont realy want to spend 700€ only for this two..

i would like to spend 700€ for the hole thing (Board, CPU, Ram GFXCard)

if there will be a Vega on 1070gtx level für 250€ i go for amd. but i think this will not happen.

Vega won't be super cheap - HBM memory. Maybe, if they have 2 models again, lower model @350-400 € and better than 1070.

RX 580 should be around 250€ for above 1060 6GB performance. And with Vulkan enabled engine closer to 1070 if it clocks high enough.

Thats what i was talking about... 250€ card thats runs qc with 250 fps at 720p with vulkan. But qc is not doom so its in the stars.

I think 480 can run it well already

It's not that Ryzen isn't good for games, it is, but it's not on the level of the current generation of Intel processors.

Ryzen equals the 4770k. It's only the current gen that it's behind in SOME games.

If you only play games, then the 7700k is what you want. If you play games and other stuff, go ryzen. If you don't want to go i7, then the 1600x is close enough to the 7600k that you might as well get the ryzen, as it's probable that it's performance will increase in future and be better for newer games, while older games it won't really matter.

I have a 3770k and I will probably still hold off for now. But, if I had a 2500k and I was going to upgrade, I would probably either get a 7700k or 1600x.

No reason to upgrade from a 2500K for another good 1-2 years at least.

That's not how benchmarks work.

Cant read this Putin shit....

Is Google Translate banned in Croatia?

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ru&...a-test-gpu

GTX1080 is on the way, now I just need an invite :D

CPU: AMD-FX 8370 4.5Ghz (8 Branduolių)

Cpu Aušintuvas: Hyper evo 212

RAM: Corsair Pro 8GB

Motininė: Msi 970 Gaming
GPU: Asus gaming Strix GTX 1060 6Gb
Maitinblokis: AeroCool KCAS 600+80W Bronze

HDD: Seagate 7200Rpm 1TB

Korpusas su skaitytuvu: Zalman Z9 Plus

For 500 euro total. Is it worth it? and it can deal with QC low settings 125fps?

AMD-FX is a nono.

Ok thanks for opinion. So i need 1k euro for decent pc.. 1060gtx 6gb and some i5 last gen..

Ryzen 5 is not a bad idea either.

better get ryzen and rx480 with 8gb instead of i5 and gtx1060.
QC will support Vulkan, rx480 is much better on that API.

also 6gb VRAM isnt enough really, 8gb is the way to go.

Wait at least for open beta and some decent hardware reviews.

i5 7600k or i7 7600k and 1070gtx 8GB

or R5 1600x and some new Vega card min 8GB .

since bathesta had a deal with AMD QC will support Vulkan. So AMD can be the best choice for QC.

But buying PC hardware right now for QC whould be realy stupid.

1k for a decent pc is the way to go..atm (on intel + nvidia 1,2k)

Thanks!

Cpu: intel Core i5-6500, Quad Core, 3.2GHz
GPu: Gigabyte GeForce® GTX 1060 G1 Gaming 6GB
RAM: 16Gb DDR4 RAM Balistix sport 2400mhz (red)
Motininė: ASUS Z170-A LGA1151 DDR4
PSU: Cooler Master GX - 650W
500GB HDD diskas
DVD-RW
Korpusas: Zalman R1


used pc , 550e?
or this 6gb 1060 gtx is to low?

If u dont OC ur cpu has to be max default ghz.. 4ghz is goal. Oc to 4.8 or 5ghz is best.

1060 6gb is little lowish if u dont want to update later..

For me its i want to buy only 1 time for qc so that i can olay 250hz min for 5 year .. even 10 if nothing breaks.

But at this time. 500 euro is more or less a nobrainer.. u will have 100- 150 fps right now in betastatus.

Buy it. And spend 500+ later on a good new card.

I would do it like this... if i would play the game so hard like u

Quake Champions is being optimized for AMD Ryzen and Vulkan, and this has been confirmed by both AMD and idSoftware.
Also QC was demoed on Pax running on R7 1800X+Rx480. If you wish to stream and game at the same time in the future maybe a Ryzen based system will be more suitable. (R5 1600X ($260), 6core/12thread cpu on par with the intel 6850k 6core/12 thread ($ 620).

That machine for 550 is a good deal tho.

I am aiming for second hand pc.. Atm I don't want to spend 1000euro for pc.. baby coming soon, wedings and so on.. :) For new pc , I would go for AMD and radeon , price/performance for QC is better then intel + nvidia.

Congratulations on your baby GUArd! \:D/ I wish you all the best!

Fist: he want to play now!

2d: they say that they want to optimize.. but i think nvidia will optimize the vulkan support too to catch up with the amd cards.

Inter allready do the same in the 8th generation around august.

Nvidia has a software based scheduler (secret for their stellar dx11 perfornance), but it will never get as much gains as amd does with dx12/vulkan under current and next gen cards. AMD has pushed real hard with async compute and hardware level schedulers on GCN. I mean I see 50+% performance boost under DooM vulkan on my setup. Also do not forget that the major conslows (ps4/ps4 pro/xbone/sbscorpio) are 100% based on AMD (cpu+gpu) and since a lot of games are made for conslows and then ported to pc, amd will automatically get optimized titles for their hardware (similar x86/64+GCN are used on their pc hardware).

I hope Intel does something interesting with x299 it seems they are panicking over amd's ryzen... I mean the 7740K looks like a desperate move on X299. AMD will also release high core/thread quad channel parts around that time.

Exciting times ahead, hoping for some healthy competition from all hardware vendors.

U are right, and i am thinking of an amd system too. But right now the i7 7700k and an 1080ti is top in gaming. Nothing amd can do here. Vega? Its not here yet... we have to wait... and than we see how it performs even vs 1080ti in dx11 or 12 vs vulkan amd.

One thing that made me curious is that almost every review of a ryzen cpu used a 1080/1080ti. It has been shown that there are some issues with nividia's drivers on ryzen, the performance is severely handicaped in some cases... The same was not verified with an amd gpu (dual rx480's), since it performed as expected on both systems.

Recent investigations have also shown that the frame times appear to be more consistent on ryzen systems, leading to that "smooth" feeling that people are talking about.

In terms of raw average fps sure, 7700k+1080ti are on top, even if sometimes it is a stuttery mess :P

It's quite delusional to think that Intel might panic 🙄

Why? They are releasing X299 earlier than they wanted, pushing 4.5GHz 4C/8T 7740K Kaby Lake X cpus on their HEDT enthusiast platform (which is insane?), at the same time they will release their Sky Lake X cpus that will top out at 12C/24T. And these news came out after the benchs that were leaked of AMD's 16C/32T quad channel cpus.

Right before Ryzen was released intel was sending e-mails to the reviewers on how they should benchmark their cpus vs Ryzen. Atm there is no reason to buy an HEDT Intel Platforn, unless you really need a 10C/20T $1700 6950X. AMD Mainstream ryzen made Intel's HEDT platform almost obsolete (same performance for less than half the price if you take into account motherboard+ram etc...), also amd's smt is more efficient than intel's HT.

The have iterated on same architecture since the ix 2xxx series of cpus, with minor architectural improvements and increased clock speeds... Also amd have scored some major deals on the server market because of ryzen, which is where the cpu makers make them fat stacks of cash.

If I was intel, I would be panicking.

I7490k 4-4.4ghz, gtx1060 6gb

Runs 130's to 210 fps depending on in a hallway, or right out in open with many people around.

Hoping it gets better as low settings arent that much different than ultra in qc, just lower fps.

Not sure about this specific combination but from what I've seen games performance is much more dependent on the GPU than the CPU -meaning that I could probably have the same fps with an old single core 3GHZ CPU from 2005 with a gtx950 -although newer CPUs use some optimization here and there

80-100fps

x 2

no

Yes.

i5-3470, 8 GB, GTX 750 Ti -> 107-155 fps


Still crap tho.

The 1060 should be strong enough for low-mid settings. Only bottleneck would be the CPU, and I personally will wait for Ryzen 5 benchmarks for QC as I think they may be an affordable alternative to an i5.

That would then be a good workstation + Quake/esport machine. For upcoming games or if you want 4k you will need to invest 1k+ atm as r4pe pointed out.

thing is what u want to archive.. my goal is to have the power for 250min fps.. since QL feels so nice with it. i can live with 720p for that but it means there has to be some scaling curz the monitor is 1080p@144hz nativ.

so the best thing what i need (btw the most ppl that like max fps) is a grafikcard that can handle 1080p at minimum 250fps with lowGfx settings.. but atm we dont know how QC brings for exemple enemymodels.. it can be done by postprocessing or something that means u have to set some settings on high!

this brings us to the processor. ryzen 5 1600x looks nice for applications and future games that need more cores but we are here for playing QC and that for the next years. dont know if QC need that many cores or will be optimized later for it. as an allrounder r5 1600x looks better on paper but if u realy buy only for QC it can be better to have min. 4core with max Ghz. btw read somewhere they run a r5 1600x at 6Ghz ;)

dont forget if u want to save money and buy a cheaper CPU to overclock it u mostly need better cooling and have to use more power so the price will be like the same as buying a i7 7700k with 4.2Ghz out of the box for 350euro.

problems is, on my notebook, QC doesn't even start.. I guess its to low spec. So I can't play beta.. So I need pc.. but I can wait and live without beta days..

i am one notebook too.. but i got lucky and get no key ;)

even if i get a key i would go to a friend or internetcafe to play some hours and see how the game feels. if i like it maybe i would buy now.. dont know.

i buyed a pc extra for doom3 and later got punished for it curz the game was shit.

i dont want to make the same mistake again.

right now i think a gtx 1070 8GB is minimum for the game and i dont want to spend 450 euro. my hopes go for Vulkan and AMD and a card for 250euro.

im fairly sure a 1060 6gb will be more than sufficient to even run mid settings at 144hz (1080p and 100% render scale - especially combined with a cpu that isnt older than 2015.

i ran an unoptimized qc beta with an i5 (3450, not OC) and an ati HD radeon 7850 (not OCed) at around 80-100 frames at 1080p and 75% render scale. and this hardware was like mid tier in 2012.

Ryzen 1600 (included decent coollervwith it) + rx 480 8GB + 16GB 2600+ ram and b350 motherboard (asus prime b350 plus).

BTW not only GPU, also CPU test.

i54460 8gb gtx9604gb low 120-150fp stutters sometimes thats all i say nothing more

resolution? low or high grafik settings?

Everything low, resolution full-hd, no scaling.

i5-3570k @ 4,5 ghz
GTX 1060 6gb
16 gb RAM

runs well

what does the 75% scale mean?

i play QL on 720p with 150% scaling in windows to match the nativ 1080p from my monitor. dont know how much imputlag it create.

but scaling 75% makes no sens for me if u want max fps... or get i something wrong.

i read somewhere that scaling it down should improve fps. and as far as i can tell it does. just give it a try.

from what i unterstand it is for better imagequality. letz say u have an old game like QL with textures for 4k. so u scale down the 4k to ur 1080nativ monitor and it looks better than 1080@100% scaling.

maybe it can work on the low end.. so scaling down 720p even more..

oh u edit ur post. 1080p scaled 75% means 810p, right?

whats if u play 720p@ 150% scaling?

.

can u try 720p with 150% scaling in windows and tell me what runs faster? and AA off oc :p

What fps range do you get with that please.

generally well above 100 on 1080p low settings

There's one doubt in me about all of this and that's about how they can do a consistent benchmark with the beta.

I think if u get 250fps in beta, it will even better in final. After all the optimising is done.

But u are right nothing is fix in beta so it can change huge from week to week.

tested: following pc`s with my friends AMD FX-6300 6x 3.5GHz and AMD FX-8350 8x 4.0GHz

with 8GB and 16GB Ram ( not big differences )

with following cards:

AMD Radeon RX 480 8192MB = smooth as fuck

Nvidia GeForce GTX1050 Ti 4GB, Palit StormX = not so bad

i5-6600K test coming soon

just saying :)

Turning most things to low and with render scaling you should be able to get them sweet sweet FPS. It ran pretty smoothly on my PC (i7 6700, GTX 970).

i think the same results with an i5 7600k and a gtx 1050 Ti 4GB = stable HD gaming

How much did you need to scale to get the fps you desired? Confused on good idea or not.

Depends on your PC really. It's still pretty clear on anything above 75%. Starts to get a little blurry etc below that, but its still playable even on like 50% so feel free to turn it down if you have a potato.

K simpler than I built it up to be thanks :)

worse cpu but better gfx card, so maybe we'll get prettie much the same fps in end :)

4790k and 1060 6gb. Ill try 75 percent next beta

I'm confused. Should my next vid card be amd or nvidia?

Ask if u want to buy the next day... it can change in the next few month

Core i5 2500K @ 4.5
8GB RAM
GTX 1060 3GB was on sale (:
Res: 1920x1080
180-200 FPS @ low settings 100% renderscale

So if anyone is on a budget Sandy Bridge can still handle it

Interesting high! What abaut 720p scaled to 1080p (windows 150% scacle)?

And 1080p scaled down to 720p ingame. Dont know how they do the math there... anyone an idea?

What runs better?

Any chance to get 250 fps?

Dam im130-200 fps with gtx 1060 6gb and i7-4790k. Wonder why so much lower than yours. Did you tweak any nvidia settings?

What GHz are you on with your CPU?

It is oc naturally, so 4ghz for 4 cores, then it goes up to 4.4ghz if needed.

Tried to overclock my 1060 6gb and had to restart my games cause they all jitterd and shut down...guess theres more to overclocking then setting extra hertz...voltage etc :((

nope didnt tweaked anything maybe the extra 500hz matter xD feel free to ask me

sry for late reply was on vacations :X

What if ryzen use one core for render?

Intel Core i5-2500k @ 3.30Ghz
2 x Geforce GTX 560 Ti (SLi)
8 GB RAM

Any suggestions for an GPU upgrade for around 250€?

Or is the PC so shitty I might just buy a new one? :D

Take a look, for 250 euros you should be able to get something that scores 8000-10,000. Match the name and price, hit google.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

You could consider a second hand card too, that will get you more performance for the same money.

try the card first, that's a pretty good CPU, and if the CPU is the bottleneck, you would still have needed a good card anyway.

I think with the right mainboard you can oc that CPU to 4+ GHz, then it's only a question of a decent GPU...

look at this comment 3 posts up or so: http://esreality.com/post/2870962/n-a/#pid2869157

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Quake-Champions...e-1226705/

Another benchmark. For now the 1060 (and higher obviously) seems to be in a nice spot. But Doom showed that the RX 480/580 have more potential if used with Vulkan.

Coming from QL/CS:GO/OW; my goal is to run QC at a stable 240 fps hence i own a 240hz monitor.
Is my current setup adequate to accomplish this?

i5 4670k @4.5ghz OC
1060 3gb @ 2k mhz OC
8gb ram

@1080p 100% res. scale
No eyecandy, everything low with tweaked nvidia settings.

I assume a stronger GPU is needed, however i suspect that my CPU will be bottlenecking anything above 1060.

Any advice appreciated.

Your cpu is still good, a 1070 should help a lot.
To run qc at 240fps you need a very high pc, better cpu and 1080

since NDA is dropped, is there any new info on the maxFPSfront?

want to play 1080p@100 scale or 66,6666666 (is it 720p, or i am worng?)

someone tryed processorlimit? (lowest grafiksettings)

can we get 250fps?