Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 impresses with great graphics. However, the RandomGaminginHD YouTube channel ran an experiment on how the Battle Royale would look with no graphics card and the result is… interesting. You can find all information about this in this article.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and the Warzone 2.0 integrated into it inspires fans worldwide with the high level of detail and how realistic it looks.
However, the YouTube channel RandomGaminginHD recently published a video showing what the Battle Royale looks like without a graphics card. The YouTuber has almost 500,000 subscribers and is known for its informative tech content. He has already carried out similar experiments with other games in the past.
The Warzone 2.0 video provides some interesting insights, which we will show you in this article.
You can watch RandomGaminginHD’s video for yourself here:
This is how Warzone 2.0 runs without a graphics card
How did RandomGaminginHD’s experiment go? Instead of a dedicated GPU, the YouTuber chose a CPU with a graphics chip under the display settings – the AMD Athlon 3000G Radeon with integrated Vega 3 Graphics. Although this 2019 processor isn’t intended as a gaming CPU, Warzone 2.0 isn’t the only game running on it.
With the Ryzen 5 5600G you currently get a much better iGPU and CPU for a good price.
*Affiliate links. We receive a small commission from Amazon if you make a purchase. Thanks for your support!
For the best performance under these conditions, RandomGaminginHD set all conceivable graphics settings to their lowest level and also selected the lowest available resolution of 710×400. In addition, the YouTuber initially ignored any upscaling options; The image was then resharpened using the integrated “FidelityFX CAS Sharpening”.
FidelityFX is AMD’s alternative to NVIDIA’s DLSS and an image quality toolkit that enables this upscaling.
The result is strongly reminiscent of the look of the old CoD parts on the PS2, but is still impressive.
But RandomGaminginHD was not only surprised by the fact that he got Warzone 2.0 to run without a graphics card at all.
It is no less amazing that a solid frame rate could still be achieved for the Battle Royale even under these conditions. During the experiment, the game ran at a constant FPS between 30 and 40 most of the time. In the Gulag – which is much less busy than on the normal Al Mazrah map – even better values could be achieved.
If instead you want to know how to get more FPS in Warzone 2.0, take a look at this article:
CoD Warzone 2: The best settings for high FPS on PC
Are there any other findings from the experiment? RandomGaminginHD was able to prove that Warzone 2.0 is not too difficult to get running. For a “free to play” multiplayer game like Battle Royale, this is of course also incredibly important.
And the YouTuber also says: “The more inclusive the game is in relation to the potential player base, the better. This is a free-to-play game that we want as many players as possible to play, and the more that can, even on a low-end PC, the better.”
If you are unsure whether the game will run on your PC, you can take a look at the system requirements in this article.
The community is very impressed with how well Warzone 2.0 runs on weak hardware
The fact that the game – despite the demake look and not really high FPS for a competitive shooter – still looks very solid is also the opinion of some commentators under the YouTube video by RandomGaminginHD:
Another commenter fails to comprehend that the AMD Athlon 3000G Radeon is capable of such feats, going so far as to describe it as “divine once more”.
Now you are asked: What do you think of the look and performance of Warzone 2.0 with a CPU instead of a GPU? Could you play in such conditions?
We also want to know from you which assault rifle from Warzone 2.0 is at the top of your list. We will then provide you with a large ranking with setups for evaluation: Which assault rifle in CoD Warzone 2 is the best? You decide