Final Fantasy XIV Official Benchmark


Recommended Posts

captureko.png

See just how well FINAL FANTASY XIV will run on your computer.

This official benchmark software uses actual maps and characters to assign a score to your PC and rate its performance.

[8000 and over] Extremely High Performance

Easily capable of running the game on the highest settings.

[5500–7999] Very High Performance

Easily capable of running the game. Should perform exceptionally well, even at higher resolutions.

[4500-5499] High Performance

Easily capable of running the game. Should perform well, even at higher resolutions.

[3000-4499] Fairly High Performance

Capable of running the game on default settings. Consider switching to a higher resolution depending on performance.

[2500-2999] Standard Performance

Capable of running the game on default settings.

[2000-2499] Slightly Low Performance

Capable of running the game, but may experience some slowdown. Adjust settings to improve performance.

[1500-1999] Low Performance

Capable of running the game, but will experience considerable slowdown. Adjusting settings is unlikely to improve performance.

[under 1500] Insufficient Performance

Does not meet specifications for running the game.

http://www.finalfant...na/index.html#2

My results

High Settings

captureain.png

Low Settings

capture4d.png

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/912436-final-fantasy-xiv-official-benchmark/
Share on other sites

Ok, so you got like, a modern and powerful ATI card, one of the highest end AMD cpus, and good RAM on top of that... and to play on decent graphic settings.. barely meets 'standard' performance requirements? Talk about mega ouch.

Does this game top out at a locked 30 FPS like FF11 did? And does this one, like FF11, also ignore your video card for the most part?

On low I only got Score: 3538, Load Time 13242ms with a GTX 260 and Q9550, I've got loads of stuff running in the background though (VMs). Will try high later.

What character did you use? Does it render the scene from a completely different perspective depending on the character?

Ok, so you got like, a modern and powerful ATI card, one of the highest end AMD cpus, and good RAM on top of that... and to play on decent graphic settings.. barely meets 'standard' performance requirements? Talk about mega ouch.

Does this game top out at a locked 30 FPS like FF11 did? And does this one, like FF11, also ignore your video card for the most part?

Yea tell me about it, Im not sure about the FPS lock, the benchmark doesnt show FPS, and I dont have fraps installed, but I noticed my CPU temp increase significantly during the benchmarking

On low I only got Score: 3538, Load Time 13242ms with a GTX 260 and Q9550, I've got loads of stuff running in the background though (VMs). Will try high later.

What character did you use? Does it render the scene from a completely different perspective depending on the character?

I just used the top male character, but the scene was first in a room with other people walking round, then he walks up some misty stairs and there is a flash and he is on a ship fighting flying jellyfish

Note that none of these machines are overclocked, except for the 8600 GTS in my desktop (and it's a factory overclock).

Scores on High, female Hyur picked each time:

Desktop: 339 - 20869ms Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, Core 2 duo E6400 @ 2.13ghz, Nvidia 8600 GTS

Laptop: 1069 - 13883ms Windows 7 HP 64-bit, Core i5 M 430 @ 2.27ghz, Nvidia GTS 360M

Friend's system: 2528 - 17235ms Windows 7 HP 64-bit, Core i7 860 @ 2.8ghz, ATI Radeon 5770

Scores on Low, Miqo'te picked each time:

Desktop: 962 - 16545ms Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, Core 2 duo E6400 @ 2.13ghz, Nvidia 8600 GTS

Laptop: 1955 - 13437ms Windows 7 HP 64-bit, Core i5 M 430 @ 2.27ghz, Nvidia GTS 360M

Friend's system: 4546 - 17443ms Windows 7 HP 64-bit, Core i7 860 @ 2.8ghz, ATI Radeon 5770

I could not play this game even on LOW and still get 'standard performance' on my own desktop or laptop. I would definitely need a new desktop machine to do this game. That's very ouch. This game is the new Crysis. Luckily, MMOs aren't really top on my priority list right now, so I wouldn't have to worry too much about this problem.

If these numbers are right, this MMO is gonna lock out most who want to play it. Still, the game looks ridiculously good even on Low settings and high setting seemed to net me only some minor drops in frame rate despite scoring only 1024 in high.

3207 for me. Seemed nice and smooth. Only ran it on the low res though, as my monitor doesn't do 1920x1080 and as such performance in that res doesn't matter to me.

The resolution is the only difference between the settings anyway. Aside from that they're both the same detail settings.

Considering the age of my desktop, it got what I thought was a reasonable score and it ran pretty smooth too:

High

Score: 2,015

Load Time: 14,269ms

Low

Score: 2,641

Load Time: 14,899ms

Machine

CPU: Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66Ghz

GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 260

OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64

What the heck. When I read the first post, I thought "Psh, no problem. My PC will get OVER 9000"...

-___-

Score on High settings - 2228

Load - 16517ms

I've never heard my video card get so loud before. What in the heck kind of computer do I need to play this thing smoothly!? xD

How much market share if any do you guys think it will take away from wow?

Personally I don't think anything major really. I got an alpha invite but the phase ended before I could get up to date with the horrendously slow downloader/patcher - I think it's bittorrent based but without wow's HTTP fallback. Plus, Cataclysm is looking REALLY good.

Anyway, my comp got 4803 - this benchmark is really bad.

Everytime someone says, "LOL THEY WILL NEVER TAKE AWAY WOWS PLAYERZ" I love it, because WE DON'T WANT WOWS PLAYERS. JUST STAY AWAY.

The less of you foaming mouthbreathers there are, the better for us.

I assume the game's going to have a monthly fee? They kinda do want people playing [and paying for] their game, unless they want to end up in the sea of failed MMOs.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • According to Microsoft, Cause: One of the drivers controlling the device notified the operating system that the device failed in some manner.   https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/error-codes-in-device-manager-in-windows-524e9e89-4dee-8883-0afa-6bca0456324e
    • This looks awesome, I will request access via Steam later this afternoon!
    • Personally, I’ve found that it’s usually worth investing in the infrastructure you don’t want to replace later, especially cabling. Running Cat6A (or better, depending on your needs) during an upgrade is relatively inexpensive compared to having to re-cable a few years down the road. For switches I try to balance current specs with realistic growth. If my budget allows it Ill choose switches with higher uplink speeds which leaves room for expanding later on, but I don’t necessarily overspend on access ports if the endpoints won’t benefit from them anytime soon. One lesson I’ve learned is that planning for scalability pays off. It’s much easier to add devices, VLANs, or higher-bandwidth workloads when your network infrastructure already supports it than to replace hardware later.  What is your budget like?
    • I hate the term, "future-proof." We saw it back in the 90's / 2000's, if not before. You cannot future-proof anything, since there is no definition of how far into the future you plan on prepping for. Best idea is to tell us what you currently have and what its use is at the moment, and we can then offer ideas about some areas that might need an upgrade and other areas that can be left alone.
    • I can agree that it is being used in a small capacity. I worked for a company where their engineers still used XP, and when asked why it was because their sensor software wasn't compatible with newer operating systems and the software was discontinued so they couldn't upgrade the software. Given that the sensors were still in use by companies, they had to continue using XP to support the sensor, otherwise the price to the company would have gone into the millions or billions. Our response was simple: Ok, you can keep the XP machine. But we're removing it from the network. "But then it can't access the Internet or folder shares!" Yup, kinda the point. If someone wants to continue using an unsecure OS they can do, I have no problem with that. But it should be isolated. Simple. I had a fight with a guy in the engineering department for weeks before he finally relented. But we digress.   What do I plan on doing to commemorate the anniversary? Nothing. I have fond memories of the OS, but at the end of the day it's just an OS. If I had some time I might see if I could install it on my Raspberry Pi for a laugh. But my reflex memory with today's OS ideas would probably get me frustrated and I'd uninstall it after 5 mins.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      539
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      154
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      99
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!