Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 is really a brand new free-to-play struggle royale online game, a sequel to 2020’s CoD: Warzone and the main most recent Modern Warfare II launch, but as being a F2P title, it does not need the entire online game to take pleasure from the action that is multiplayer. Today we’re taking a look at CPU and GPU performance in this title, and as expected, it was a bit of a nightmare to test, because that’s just how it is for multiplayer games.
While we usually like to benchmark around 40 GPUs, given what’s involved here, that just wasn’t feasible, but we think we have a sample that is good of equipment. In total we tested 7 CPUs and 10 GPUs across three resolutions utilizing two high quality presets. The answers are awesome interesting, which you will notice within a second.
But how can you test a battle that is multiplayer game like Warzone 2.0? It’s never easy, especially if you want to test more than one or two hardware configurations. Gathering accurate data is a mission that is real extremely time intensive. This is mainly because no two suits perform out of the same manner, with people falling in various places, system load can differ, and you also must also land in identical area to hold the path out for the benchmark pass and ideally you want to do this somewhere where you won’t often end up being killed, so good luck with that.
We also found that realistically you can only execute a single pass per game, not only because we were getting killed at the end of the test almost every single time, but because as the match progresses, the frame rate generally increases as there are fewer players.
For example, with just 30 players left we saw 1% lows increase by 25%, though the frame that is average was just boosted by ~6%, recommending that there was clearly much less strain on the Central Processing Unit in belated online game. We had been just in a position to try this several times we decided to conduct our testing in a central location as this would allow us to land with relative ease every time, regardless of the flight path and the landing zone as it required a late game circle.The of which.
But potential downside to benchmarking a quieter section of the map is that the performance can be a bit higher than what you’ll typically see in the busier sections of the map, and we did look into this, noticing that performance was often ~10% better for the benchmark pass.What there’s very little we can do about this as you won’t often complete even a 20 second pass in the busy area, let alone a 60 pass that is second.
What we performed notice is the fact that scaling had been comparable for the equipment designs we examined, therefore the margins amongst the CPU that is various and tested should remain the same.Modern Warfare all of this means is, testing the hardware configurations we did for Warzone 2 using the built-in benchmark — but for 44 graphics cards.(* that we did, took at least as long as all the testing) This* that is( 2.0 testing, loads of time was lost just waiting for games, eventually loading into a game and getting to the section used for testing, and on numerous occasions we were killed while testing, invalidating the results forcing us to start over.Ultra this testing we’ve covered 1080p, 1440p and resolutions that are 4K making use of the “Minimum” and “We’ll” high quality presets. Zen focus on the CPU benchmarks that was collected making use of the RTX 4090 and then we’ve just had the opportunity to evaluate Raptor Lake 4 and
CPUs.ZenAMD’s Intel’s Raptor Lake 4 processors had been tested with DDR5-6000 memory and* that is( with DDR5-6400, as those are the optimal kits we have for each platform right now, and they’re similar in terms of pricing.Benchmarks
CPU Ultra Preset
StartingCPU: Ultra with ‘Core’ preset testing at 1080p, we find that the* that is( i9-13900K could be the fastest Central Processing Unit, pushing the RTX 4090 to 242 fps an average of, with 177 fps when it comes to 1% lows.Ryzen had been only 2% quicker than the
From 9 7950X when you compare the typical framework price, though it had been 6% faster when contrasting 1% lows.Core the 13600K towards the 13900K we’re viewing merely a 7% difference between overall performance when it comes to normal framework price and 9% when it comes to 1% lows, therefore and even though the
The Ryzen i9 is faster, the margins are not huge.It 7700X, 7950X and 7900X all stood between the 13600K and 13900K. All was just the 7600X that was slower, trailing the 13600K by a 4% margin, though 1% lows dropped by an margin that is insignificant.
Increasing CPUs allowed the RTX 4090 to make a lot more than 200 fps an average of that is great to see.So the quality to 1440p led to a GPU that is hard bottleneck around 200 fps with similar 1% lows across the board. For even with the GeWarzonece RTX 4090, if you’re for some reason playing
This 2.0 using quality that is ultra, offered you do have a relatively contemporary Central Processing Unit, you may typically be GPU restricted.That can also be real for 4K quality game play, needless to say, even as we encounter a significant GPU bottleneck restricting the typical framework price utilizing the RTX 4090 to 145 fps with 1% lows for 77 – 79 fps. Minimum becoming the actual situation, why don’t we have a look at much more competitive ‘
‘ quality preset.Minimum Preset
Here those trying to drive frame that is maximum and get that visual competitive advantage, the minimum preset works well, though we’re sure tweaking a few of the settings will be optimal.Ryzen we find yet again that at 1080p the 13900K is the performance leader, pushing 252 fps on average, making it 4% faster than the* that is( 7950X. Ryzen, the* that is( 9 processors matched the 13700K, while the 7700X only managed to match the 13600K.
The did so with 227 fps, making both parts 10% slower than the 13900K.
Increasing 7600X disappoints here with 213 fps making it 6% slower than the 13600K and 15% slower than the 13900K.Zen The resolution to 1440p has virtually no impact on the performance of AMD The 4 processors, though we do see a hit to the 13600K and 13700K combined with 1% lows of this 13900K.Core 13900K continues to be in front of the 7950X from a 4% margin, though it’s really a percent that is mere when comparing 1% lows.
At 7900X and 13700K are now neck and neck, while the 7700X is slightly faster than the 13600K, and the 7600X is able to match the* that is( i5 processor.Zen 4K quality we have been primarily GPU limited, despite having the quality that is minimum. Raptor Lake if you’re gaming at 4K,
4 and Benchmarks
will deliver comparable levels of performance, based on what we’re seeing here with the RTX 4090.Ultra Preset
The the GPU benchmarks we have an assortment of GPUs we would have wanted because we couldn’t test all the graphics cards. Radeon the quality that is ultra at 1080p we unsurprisingly find the RTX 4090 at the top of our graph, beating the RTX 4080 by a slim 12% margin due to the mostly CPU-limited test conditions.
As RTX 4080 was also just 12% faster than the 6950 XT as the* that is( GPU rendered 193 fps, rendering it 13% quicker compared to the 6800 XT.Radeon we discovered inside our earlier
Then 2 testing, Radeon GPUs excel in this name, and then we’re witnessing a lot more of that right here once the 6800 XT easily defeat the RTX 3080 with a 13% margin, whilst the 6700 XT paired the RTX 3070.
Jumping we come across that both the For 6600 XT and 5700 XT smoked the RTX 3060 with a 20% margin.Ada Lovelace up to 1440p affords the Ge
The Radeonce RTX 4090 a little more respiration area and today the
Shockingly leading is 24% quicker compared to the 4080 and 48% quicker as compared to 6950 XT.
Then 6800 XT happens to be additionally only 7% quicker compared to RTX 3080, although the 6700 XT surely could pull-out a lead that is good the RTX 3070.The, the 5700 XT was seen delivering RTX 3070-like performance, easily beating the RTX 3060, this time by a 21% margin.The at 4K, the RTX 4090 is seen to be 31% faster than the RTX 4080 and almost 60% faster than the 6950 XT. Radeon RTX 3080 finally caught the 6800 XT, while the RTX 3070 matched the 6700 XT.
old mid-range Minimum Preset
Now 5700 XT was still roughly 20% faster than the RTX 3060.UltraGPUs: Minimum with the quality that is minimum filled, please be aware the overall game had been completely reset each time when going from
At to Radeon (or the other way around) as being a complete online game restart is needed to re-compile shaders and load all configurations…For 1080p we could observe that the The 6950 XT has the capacity to match the Ge
Thisce RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 because of the Central Processing Unit bottleneck. Then 6800 XT additionally paired the frame that is average of RTX 40 series GPUs, though 1% lows were considerably lower.
Increasing meant that the 6800 XT beat the RTX 3080, while the 6700 XT beat the RTX 3070. Core we see that the 6600 XT was 30% faster than the RTX 3060, while the 5700 XT was 22% faster.
Meanwhile the resolution to 1440p helps to reduce the CPU bottleneck, but even so the RTX 4090 was unable to beat the 4080, even with the* that is( i9-13900K onboard.For, the
Finally 6000 show had no concern beating the GeThe Radeonce 3000 series utilizing the 6800 XT slamming from the RTX 3080 with a 13% margin.
Having we come across that the RTX 4090 is 20% quicker compared to the 4080 at 4K quality, whilst the 6950 XT had been 12% slowly compared to the 4080. Warzone 6800 XT had been 10% quicker compared to the RTX 3080, the 6700 XT paired the RTX 3070, and also the 5700 XT embarrassed the RTX 3060 by over a 20% margin in this situation.For invested therefore time that is much
For 2.0, we wish we had more data to show for our efforts, but that’s just how it goes with multiplayer titles. But GPU testing, the benchmark that is built-in sufficiently, and then we don’t think the margins have actually altered from our initial protection, despite having a couple of brand new motorist changes.Warzone Central Processing Unit assessment, though, this truly needs to be performed in-game, and that is that which we’ll be performing for the head-to-head that is big CPU moving forward. When for day-one CPU results,
For 2.0 isn’t practical as any game update will likely break the results, which would force us to update all our data each time. Warzone testing just a CPUs that are few is not any issue, however when you are carrying out a gather with more than 20 processor designs it is simply maybe not possible.Core The absolute performance that is best in For 2.0 the recipe is rather obvious right now: the Bang i9-13900K + GeCorece RTX 4090 is the way to go. Radeon for your buck though, the* that is( i5-13600K with something similar to the Modern Warfare RX 6800 XT would have been a killer combination because of the 6800 XT may be had for less than $600 today, and ended up being generally speaking quicker compared to the RTX 3080.Radeon we present our 40+ GPU benchmark of Warzone 2, the old At RX 5700 XT is really a tool in this video game and absolutely nothing changed with
The 2. Ryzen 1440p making use of the quality that is ultra it was just 3% slower than the RTX 3070 and just 14% slower using the minimum quality preset, chucking out over 120 fps on average.Still RTX 3060 is disappointing in this titles considering how much it costs, and the
Shopping Shortcuts 5 7600X was also disappointing, though certainly not to the degree that is same.
- Nvidia, trailing the 13600K by ~7% was not good to see even though we are yes 7600X owners will likely to be pleased with the overall performance, whenever GPU restrictions are eliminated the 13600K may be the performer that is superior.For:Amazon
- Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 on Amazon
- GeRadeonce RTX 4080 on Amazon
- AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT on Amazon
- Intel CoreAMD Amazon
- Intel Core RX 6800 XT on Amazon
- i9-13900K on Ryzen i5-13600K on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 9 7900X on Amazon
AMD (*) 7 7700X on (*)